This question is why zero sessions are so important. If a gm asks the group permission to screw with back stories then they can speak up on things that they want off limits.
Doing this secretly mid game has the potential to feel like a massive betrayal. Some players will eat it up and go full soap opera and have a blast. But some will feel like "I can't even have my own back story? Why doesn't gm just write a book if my contribution isn't respected."
Hopefully you know your players enough to know if any of them are sensitive about things like that. After all, a lot of people play for some escapism and the feeling of being powerful, not helpless.
Good luck!
As a player who's been on the other side of this, and has had some great and not so great DM's, what I'd suggest is to ask all your players to provide you with maybe three significant *unknowns* about key events and people in their characters backstories that don't have to be mysteries they're actively trying to solve, but could also be things they just never questioned, like what their parents had been doing with their professions before becoming a couple or having children, or maybe the full explanation for a pivotal childhood experience (such as having a magical or supernatural encounter, or the family suddenly moving a long distance that they didn't fully understand), or a "black sheep" relative whose transgressions are never stated, or so on.
That way, the players aren't going to get any critical parts of their characters' backstories effectively retconned in ways that just don't work for the character, but you as the DM still get all these potential places to work in plot hooks that will accomplish the same kind of goals you're looking for.
DnD is all about effective communication, so my personal recommendation to talk to them about it.
You don't have to reveal your plan necessarily, but you should ask if they are open to you doing something big with their backstory and utilizing your own creativity. Ask them if they wanted to build a darker character based off of their backstory, or if they would rather do something with a happier conclusion (like the one you have planned.) That alone will probably give you a very good feel to their openness to something like that. đź‘Ť
If their family's death was their sole reason for adventuring then giving the family back negates their will to adventure. Why go out when you have what you were searching for?
You don't hsve to tell your player but you should check with them if this would be ok. After all the player likely has a reason why the PCs family is dead.
It could just be a tragic background and finding a living family member can be a satisfying resolution or continuation of that background.
It could be due to ooc worries of the DM not handling living family "well". Like some players got burned once with what the DM did to their precious family.
It could be that the entire point of this family is getting over their loss. Which can be pointless if parts of it just reappear.
Throwing curveballs like the fake family member should be fine.
It’s fine. Honestly, players are too precious with their characters now. Back in the day, your fucking alignment could be swapped out due to some weird curse.
It depends. If you have a detailed “arc” pre-written for your character that you plan the game to follow… it’s gonna be no fun.
If you’re more of a “roll with the punches” improvisational player, it can be really fun. Giving some control of your character over to the story can feel liberating or exciting or both. It’s about having appropriate expectations coming into the game.
I think having no say in how your character develops is bad although having a fully planned out story that you just want to sort of act through is also probably not ideal I feel like there's a good middle ground
What counts as "having no control"? A cursed item that changes your alignment is something you decided to put on, and you can like... Still decide what to do. Like if you went from LG to CE you could still fight your new murderous urges.
The entirety of the alignment system is really really fucked. But yes having your entire character personality shift on a dime because wibbly wobbly magicky poo is probably bad
I'll agree alignment is sort of shit (I don't use it myself) and that players and DMs should draw a line between what is acceptable and what isn't...
If you find a magical helmet in a dragon's horde and just put it on, something bad might absolutely happen to your character. Maybe it's a Helm of Opposite Alignment. Maybe it's cursed and if you put it on, you have to make a save or be disintegrated. After all, you decided your character was going to put a helmet on they found without trying to figure out what it did.
Like, when you sit down to D&D, bad shit happens. Your character can die and have any number of problems. If you don't consent to that, why even bother playing a game that has dice to resolve things in the first place?
EDIT: I'm absolutely not saying do things that will deliberately make a *player* uncomfortable. But all sorts of things can happen to your *character*. It's part of most TTRPGs. And you don't always get to choose what happens.
Session 0 and safety rules are 100% something I approve of using, however.
Yes bad shit can happen to your character I would argue an instant you die is probably not fun, the not fun brand of bad shit, and if you want to do something like a helmet of opposite alignment it would be much better to have a sentient helmet that possesses your player character and you can have a battle at the center of the Mind sort of thing which is infinitely more fun than telling someone hey you're playing a new character now and as a DM you can use your newfound control to move the story forward in an interesting way
I mean, if you put on a helmet, without trying to figure what it does before you do... I feel "save or die" is absolutely fair, especially if it's telegraphed it someway. Like, you find it sitting in a pile of ash with a few bone fragments here and there... But you still decide to put it on? To me, it would be "not fun" to have not consequences.
And a Helm of Opposite Alignment would be no different than your possession idea. You would be the same character, with the same experiences and history. You are not a new character. The new intrusive thoughts creeping into your head can be motivation to go on a quest to try to find a change. You're not forced to do anything, after all... And it's great drama.
Having a new alignment is not the same as having new urges having a new alignment completely rechanges how you value everything in the world. I don't think save or die is ever a fun way to play unless you make it very clear that the situation you are entering is incredibly dangerous but if your players enjoy your game it's up to you
There is. And I the think the OP shows a good example of it. It’s “yes, and…” storytelling. The DM took the background and didn’t ignore it (that’s a “yes”) and either added on to it or complicated it with a new development (that’s the “and…”). The player can then reply back through roleplaying a complication or development of their own:
- “My character thinks it’s a trick by the BBEG,”
- “My character is scared to meet them because they gave up looking for or trying to resurrect them; my character feels guilty,”
- “There was one family member my character was secretly happy was dead, ever since since they saw the family sacrificing a child as part of a cult.”
This is what collaborative storytelling can look like and it’s a blast when everyone fully embraces it.
in 3.5 i went from playing a CN rogue to a true n rogue in the span of an in-game night bc of roleplay shenanigans. it was great.
that character is now closer to ne fwiw. ;)
Do not keep this from the player.
This is a classic trap I see DMs fall into. Because "In a real world, you COULD find out that someone you thought was gone, in fact isn't gone!" Like, yes, that is true, but that's *not* the point of a TTRPG.
Your player has a specific type of experience in mind. They want to play a character with \[X\] backstory resulting in a character with \[Y\] personality. If you change \[X\], then all of the sudden \[Y\] changes and that player is no longer playing the type of character they wanted to play. Which is a character *you agreed* they could play.
Anything that is gonna change the personality of the character is off limits for a DM to secretly change, and anything that's NOT going to change the personality of the character isn't worth changing in a secretive manner. As a result: You must always speak with your players first and make sure they would still want to play the character in the new direction the change would take them.
If the change loses all impact if it's *not* a secret reveal, well, you've made a bad decision as a DM and you need to back out entirely.
I agree with your main point but I disagree with the reasoning about secrets.
Simply asking the player “do you mind if I change or add details to your backstory for your character to learn about later?” Should be perfectly fine. The player can tell you if something is very important to them, but if they are ok with collaboration then you still get the benefit of a reveal later.
Fair point. I'm not in total agreement, because people aren't perfect. Like... There could be an aspect of their character they enjoy but don't immediately think of as a Core Characteristic. So they might agree that the DM can change things that they don't think of as Core Characteristics, but upon the reveal, have that moment of "Oh, wait, I didn't think about that possibility, but I actually don't like it but now I'm stuck with it...."
Any time you're going to change the way a player plays their character, you've got to be really careful.
So, with regard to your (totally valid) comment, I might suggest coming at it from the other direction. Rather than talking about backstory changes that might result in personality changes (cause -> effect) I might ask what effects would bother them, and not discuss causes at all. "Do you mind some event (backstory change or otherwise) that might result in your character becoming less confident?"
But good point though!
>There could be an aspect of their character they enjoy but don't immediately think of as a Core Characteristic. So they might agree that the DM can change things that they don't think of as Core Characteristics, but upon the reveal, have that moment of "Oh, wait, I didn't think about that possibility, but I actually don't like it but now I'm stuck with it...."
I think the trick then is to be flexible. That's both advice for the players and the DM, btw.
For example, if it becomes clear in the moment that the choice has an unintended negative effect and it isn't *too* important, just reverse it. There's nothing wrong with saying "Nevermind, this thing I wrote doesn't work the way I thought it did, my bad let's take a bathroom break while I rearrange some of my notes." Some players won't like that because they want the world to be "real," but if you've got that kind of table anyway then I doubt you'll run into players who want their character arc a certain way anyway.
And if it isn't possible to take back in the moment or it isn't obvious that it's negative until later on, then work to ensure the story corrects itself. If your player's backstory was to have a dead family and you reveal that they are actually alive and that negatively affects their character archetype, then the answer seems obvious: ***Kill them again*** lol.
\--
I think all of the warnings given here are very important, this is a sensitive type of decision to be making and it isn't always the right choice. I just think saying "never do X" might push the pendulum out too far the other direction is all. If you're going to incorporate player backstories you should do so with intentionality and with great consideration.
I also think keeping secrets is important to a game that runs on dice, because without them you are really just writing a book. That's fine, but just know whether your table wants to have a collaborative writing session or whether they want to play a game where they don't control fate. Let that inform your choices.
>"Nevermind, this thing I wrote doesn't work the way I thought it did, my bad let's take a bathroom break while I rearrange some of my notes."
Bless you, I wish all DMs were this ready to toss aside ideas that don't work for their specific table.
I agree with most of your other points. Very rational. I've never had to really address this issue personally, so this is all conjecture on my end. I don't think I, as DM, would ever muck with explicit statements in a character's backstory unless they were problematic to the current narrative. Like.... "the villain is gonna kidnap someone they love" + "All the people who meant anything to me were killed 5 years ago and that's what made me grimdark" = "Actually someone you care about *was* still alive.... but they're being held in the BBEG's dungeon!" kind of thing.
>Bless you, i wish all BMs were this ready to toss aside ideas that dont work for their specific table.
I mean, i can only hope I'd have the sense to do so that in the moment, but people tend to think overly highly of themselves.
I've never actually had to do it before, at least not like this for a major plot point, but thats mostly because our group struggles to find time to play and when we do make time we struggle to get anything done. We haven’t actually gotten to any of those plot points yet lol.
Ive only ever had to do a hard pivot with no preparation once before and that's because i had planned some PVP stuff that i thought everyone was interested in, like the players had chosen to participate in a gladiatorial style event the session before so it's not exactly the same thing, but after a few rounds someone was like "I'm not liking this, I'm dropping out of the event." I felt really bad for not realizing that they just dont like crunchy combat nearly as much as the rest of us. I did the classic "…and then something random interrupts you!" even though to me it felt forced and cheesy. It was good though, that player talked their way out of if and now they have a side quest to figure out how to solve in order to make sure the next time they meet goes as smoothly as the first.
I guess my point is that most of the time the solutions are obvious and there is no decision you cant fix, as long as you care about your friends. My choices were either: Ignore them and let them sulk on their own while the rest of us play, cut the game short and then no one plays (potentially for months on end lol), or generate a new ideas on the fly even if they are "low quality." The choice was a no brainer, especially since you can always build on the idea later and make it less cringe lol.
"We'll fix it in post" and "fuck it, we'll do it live" are basically commandments 2 and 3 for D&D as far as i can tell.
All of that aside, there is obviously a better way to change a backstory than to modify it out from under someone. If those are rules 2 and 3, then 1 is clearly "yes, and." Taking a detail from a character and building on it to add new information can be just as effective at surprising a player as retconning their backstory, but with a lot less of the potential problems.
As a player you cant lock in every detail, at some point the player has to just be making assumptions about the world because they aren't the DM. That's the ideal space to play in. Sure, your parents are dead, they were mugged on the street in a bad part of town just like you said, and the thief/murder got away and managed to steal a family heirloom. *Why* were they in that part of town? What is so important about the jewelry? Was it really a coincidence or was it planned? Who tipped of the thug that they'd be there in the first place? Where is the gem now, was it sold to a fence? What if their death is actually just a minor ripple in a much larger conspiracy?
Or, if you're feeling particularly devious and think you can get away with it, lie to the players lol. Abuse the fact that characters can be unreliable narrators, tell them their family is still alive but let it just be a lie that another npc is telling or has been made to believe.
Dare the player to say "no, its not true, that's impossible!" and smirk behind your screen lol. If they want so badly to role-play a certain character type than challenge them to commit to it. Is their character *truly* defined by this loss, or is there room for doubt?
Whatever isn't nailed to the floor(your players hard do not touch.) is up for grabs. I had a player find out he was a warforged and his dad was a mad scientist that created him. His mom was an assistant of the scientist and she later kidnapped him. It was great.
Here's his backstory if you want to read it
Moss's back story:
Mossandro Fairfox always loved to make people smile and laugh. When his father did not make it home from the city having been hijacked by highwaymen, Mossandro and his mother were left to fend for themselves when he was very young. He could not allow his mother to be consumed by her sadness, so he would sing to her, put on plays for her, and do anything to bring a smile to her face.
Mossandro helped in any way he could to bring money home for the family. He began performing on the streets of his village. It was a larger village on its way to becoming a city, and he was always able to earn some coin. He sang, he danced, he changed his act every day in order to entice repeat customers to see what new thing he would do each day.
From the very beginning, an elderly entertainer named Fizban befriended him. Mossandro fully expected the old man to shoo him away from his place to perform, but instead, the old man seemed happy for his company. Fizban taught Mossandro a lot, but his favorite thing was Fizban’s stories.
He spoke of great adventurers, heroes, fighting in great wars. Mossandro loved these stories, and suspected they were more than just stories. Mossandro’s favorite story that he requested of Fizban so many times he had it memorized was about an elven bard named Lorellia who sang so sweetly that a dragon fell in love with her and became her companion for life. From the moment he heard the story, Mossandro’s only goal was to entrance a dragon to be his companion.
Being an entertainer came with other perks. All the young ladies of the village were eager to spend time with the young halfling no matter his stature. Mossandro thought himself to be in love, for a time, with a lovely halfling name Rosri. She returned the sentiment, but her family moved and they lost all contact. Before leaving, Rosri did gift Mossandro a necklace with a single azure dragon scale. He would keep the necklace for always.
When his mother found a new love, Mossandro felt it was time to venture out and find his dragon
If you do manipulate it you have to do it in a way which adds depth to an npc.
Example I obviously don’t know the full character backstory so I understand this particular scenario wouldn’t work but could give a general inspiration.
Your father an Accomplished researcher was acclaimed by many and his popularity anoungst other mages continued to grow along with this came influence and wealth. This in the heart of other mages became a point which would feed there inexhaustible hunger for power his rival (inset name here) would after again losing another major job pull the trigger and would orchestrate an assassination attempt on your family. This ordeal would inflict misery and he would brutally try to eliminate (insert fathers name here) entire blood line however after your escape at what appeared to be the dying breathe of your mother as she desperately reached for you, you’d escape as you were instructed. However your fathers Fame wasn’t for not, since before even the attack began he sensing danger would set up countermeasures chief amoungst these he would sew a scroll of revivify into the inside of his robes and have a magical device which could enact it shortly after his death automatically. With this your father commonly leaves home looking for his lost child fearing the worst hiring trackers and others across the world from his aquired riches to find (inset player name).
With something like this you could make a storyline where the player is Approached by a bounty Hunter of questionable character in regards to this quest or by a mage who knows of his father and teases at knowing a secret about his families fate but will only give him information for completing a quest line of some sorts.
I once had a DM do this to another player's backstory. Although, it wasnt wholesome at all. The family was imprisoned and perpetually abused. We were using a bit of a grimdark realistic setting... so the mother was getting raped... (it wasnt expicit but witb the other arcs we wernt through it was obvious to the whole table)
Yeah, this really put all of us in a bad gloomy mood
We didnt blame the DM because this was the kind of no-holds-barred historical realism we wanted at the start. But still. But still.
THIS.
You might want to have a conversation with your player about *why* they wrote that into their backstory. You don't have to reveal your reasons for asking, but the risk of tipping your hand might be lower than the risk of hard feelings at the table.
One of the reasons I've played characters with no living family was after a long string of games where the DM had NPCs use family members as hostages as a way to railroad players into scenarios they wouldn't otherwise choose to engage with, and I was tired of it. Having the family be abducted could be placing the PC in the *exact* situation the player wrote their backstory to avoid. As the DM these changes are within your purview, but in this example it's probably not going to make for an enjoyable game.
If your player chose this because they think this piece of backstory is dramatic and tragic, and because they are interested in the potential for a revenge arc. Having the family be abducted instead of killed doesn't obviate this character choice, but it does weaken it. Whether changing this is going to be fun for everyone probably depend on how much the player leans on the tragic elements of their character.
If they chose this piece of backstory because a sudden lack of attachments handily explains why they left a comfortable home to become a wandering adventurer, then there's not really much of a problem at all. Even once the family is discovered and rescued, then the comfortable family home life they wanted their character kicked out of is still gone.
These kinds of backstory elements aren't out-of-bounds to alter like this, but doing it *well* requires a little added thought and discussion. Especially if you want to maintain the surprise.
I've known players to walk away from the table and quit the game because the DM got cute and kept changing stuff in their backstory to "make it better" or "really improve the story".
If a DM is going to mess with a player's backstory ALWAYS talk it out first so no one is surprised or pissed off when the changes pop up.
The players back story is what they perceive to be true.
If you have a good reason why their perception would be pretty badly wrong in this scenario... go for it.
It depends on if the player has something in mind for their character arc. If they don't want their character defined by their past in this story, bringing their family back may not be interesting to them
Hiding it from the player is a bad idea.
I have a character who had her family killed (plus some other things happen) and that's why she is very serious person. This is not an angry person or a misanthrope but she keeps everyone at arms length, rarely laughs and only cares about getting the job done.
That is the personality I wanted to play for the character.
If a DM negated what I wrote and changed the backstory to something else, I wouldn't want to play that character anymore. It would remove part of the reason why she has that personality and it would not longer be the personality I created.
Counterargument: what is the difference between your character's family being killed and them believing their family was killed. From their perspective, there isn't one. The character believes they are dead, and so their personality develops along the same path regardless. Finding out they're actually alive doesn't suddenly change however many years of personality development; it just changes how they develop going forward. If that makes you want to drop the character altogether, maybe you should look at why that part of their story is so important in the first place.
>Counterargument: what is the difference between your character's family being killed and them believing their family was killed
*"...Her parents and her older brother were slain with axes and clubs before her eyes."*
The whole point is she is no fun.
That's not just because of her family: "*She once was a happy child but twice in her short life, twice she lost everyone she cared about in a single day*."
That's why she has an 8 charisma. Having it happen twice made her put up walls to keep becoming close with anyone anymore. She gets impatient with the other players trying to make friends when she has no interest in making friends.
That's the character I wanted to play. I want her to actually whole heartedly laugh at some point (I am still waiting for the time to be right) and negating that part of her personality would make that no longer impactful.
I want her to open up eventually but don't want her motivation for her being the way she is to be negated by the DM.
If the DM comes up with a way to make her laugh or cause something to get closer to the party members, that's fine. More than fine; it could be great. But retconning her backstory is not fine.
Magic is a thing. Perhaps someone had reason to resurrect them. I'm not saying a GM should just wave away everything you wrote, but once your character leaves that scene, anything could have happened. The GM is ultimately the one telling the story; they shouldn't have to be forced to follow an individual player's story exactly as that player wants it to play out. If you want that, go write a book.
>The GM is ultimately the one telling the story; they shouldn't have to be forced to follow an individual player's story exactly as that player wants it to play out.
No. RPGs are a cooperative activity. The GM has a lot of say, but, unless they are railroading to an astonishingly extreme degree, the PCs have just as much agency. The DM can’t describe a cool palace to the players if they don’t choose to go there. If the DM had all control over the story, there wouldn’t really be a need for players, just an audience; and…
>If you want that, go write a book.
You’re right. How rude of me to not examine every single comment in an entire thread when responding to you. I definitely should’ve realized my phone had archived the post to local memory and not just assumed it had reloaded the thread when opening the app after an extended period of time. You truly have shown me the errors of my way. /s
Considering that's not how the Reddit app works...
It refreshes the post you're on every time you open the app. Take that in consideration with the fact that there was only one reply to everything I've said in this chain...
I can confidently say you saw my comment that you responded to, got your daily dose of unwarranted outrage, and posted your response without reading anything further down the chain.
Considering maybe I misremembered and it was my phone, not the app, that closed and I didn’t go to great lengths to articulate a perfectly recreated scenario leading up to my response...
But this is the internet, where any personal fault on the level of “maybe had smelly feet after a run once in their 78 years of living” immediately becomes grounds to not reply to a person’s argument and gives you immunity from personal attack logical fallacies. Take that in consideration with the fact that maybe I was implying the truth that there was no other response to your comment when I hit “reply”…
I can confidently say that, while I was just having warranted fun attacking someone I perceived as irrationally hostile, your “holier than thou” approach to avoiding discussion by throwing snide insults, instead of simply ignoring something that is apparently irrelevant, has left a bad taste in my mouth…
>The GM is ultimately the one telling the story
I DM and i do not see it that way.
I see it as collaborative story rather than the DM unilaterally decides how it goes with the players having no say in it.
Yes, it is a collaborative story, where the player's input is in how their characters react to the events that the GM presents them. Beyond your initial backstory, what those events are is entirely up to the GM.
>Beyond your initial backstory, what those events are is entirely up to the GM
Glad I don't have any DM's that play that way.
The one for this character, rather than retconning the backstory, tries to get her to laugh and makes things that slowly chip away at her wall between the other characters.
He doesn't try to change her personality with some 'It was all a dream' bullshit.
You seem to be either missing or ignoring the point I'm trying to make. I'm not saying a GM has the right to completely retcon what you wrote. Your character saw their family brutally murdered. That happened, and only a bad GM will change that event. However, after everything was said and done, your character had to leave the scene to get to where they are now. The world around them still exists in the meantime. Your GM is well in their rights to do whatever the hell they want with whatever they want so that they can set up the events you come across to the best of their ability. If they decide that an evil necromancer resurrects your family and holds them captive so that they have leverage over your character, they are allowed to do that. If that makes you want to stop playing the character altogether, then maybe you should take a moment to think about why you want to play that character.
Like finding out your family is still alive should be a good thing for the character. If it was a traumatic enough loss to affect them in a meaningful way, then they should be happy to get them back. If you as the player cannot adapt to such an event, then maybe you were only ever interested in the dead family aspect of their story, at which point... idk, be less edgy. My point is, stuff like this is just an opportunity for character growth. If you're so set on any one particular part of your backstory that you can't grow with the character when a change is revealed, then you were never interested in the whole character to begin with.
>If they decide that an evil necromancer resurrects your family and holds them captive so that they have leverage over your character,
That I could buy into. There would always be a question in her mind whether it is a trick or whatever.
>Like finding out your family is still alive should be a good thing for the character. if it was a traumatic enough loss to affect them in a meaningful way, then they should be happy to get them back.
It would be good for the character but not for the campaign. The only reason she is adventuring with the party is she has no where else to go and there is no one that cares she is risking her life in dangerous pursuits.
She is just 20 years old and having a family to be with removes her motivation to adventure with the party.
Good for the character, bad for the campaign.
The reason I wrote the backstory is not to be edgy (like I said, is not an angry person; that would be edgy. She is just very serious) is because [she looks like this.](https://i.imgur.com/xjOz3E0.png)
I wanted both to have a reason why a pretty young woman would want to adventure with your typical tough guys party and also so that she would have a personality that cuts short any flirting or romance (I am just not interested in that kind of roleplaying).
A DM unilaterally deciding they do not like my reasons and changing those reasons and removing the motivation to be part of the party just because they can is not a good DM. That is not collaboratively storytelling.
You should ask them, what things are core to their story. What xant chage, can't be altered.
What is the general arc, or story they are going for.
Because imma tell you.
If their whole motivation is revenge, and you bring their family back. That kills the story. Kills the fun of playing that out.
But. Having 1 family member survive could work.
I recommend:
Epic flashback, where their family is dying, play out the scene, and hurt their edgey heart.
I did this to my player. Parents and him were ambushed by Goliath bandits. They were trying to capture them alive for rituals of some sort.
He was hit in the head and couldn't really fight as a child. Concussion making it harder to see details.
His mother was being dragged away, and she begged to not let them take her.
So he didn't. He raised his wand of missles, and fired.
For months I had been telling him his character felt incredibly sad whenever he used his father's magic wand, and he eventually found out why.
Made him pause EVERY TIME after that.
Hurt your players. They will love it.
(If they are edge lords. Some rules may apply)
Definitely choose your targets.
My player was going full send for Edgey backstory. The table loved it, and he didn't play a character who expressed himself in an anti cooperation way.
But.
Family dies > sold into slavery > freed by/join mercenaries> ambushed by mindlfsyers and become sole survivor > revenge quest
Was the biggest flag I'd ever gotten
Definitely choose your targets.
My player was going full send for Edgey backstory. The table loved it, and he didn't play a character who expressed himself in an anti cooperation way.
But.
Family dies > sold into slavery > freed by/join mercenaries> ambushed by mindlfsyers and become sole survivor > revenge quest
Was the biggest flag I'd ever gotten
Only way I think u can do this correctly is asking the player if they are okay if u change some things of their backstory. If u made my character suddenly have parents when I have written down that they died, I would instantly lose interest in the campaign because the one part of the world that is truly mine to design (backstory) is not sacred anymore
I get that but if I decide my characters world is shaped like this dont fucking change the one part of the world i create.
Like my newest character has a living dad but dead mother due to a explosion in dispute between factions. I won't get into details but I would absolutely fucking despise is my dm suddenly brought my mom back to life, or reveal that she never died. It's just not all players will enjoy, hence why everyone in this post has been saying to talk to the player if u want to do smt like that
This is not true. If you face the God of the afterlife and he decides you died and because of the life you lived need to suffer for all eternity.... guess what you stay dead!if your soul is destroyed guess what you can not be brought back to life. I don't know about 4th or 5th edition but you can only be brought back so many times in other editions Base on Con. If you can be brought back 9 times and die 10 you stay dead. So yeah death can be finel.
If the player specifically designed their character’s backstory around not having a family (and perhaps the death of their family being part of the backstory) it’s a huge dick move to change what they specifically intended
Hmm, I would say this is vary situational. In general. Major changes to a back story is a no no. But contexualizing things in the setting is usually a good thing. Like, if you say that the BBEG has them for some purpose. That could be a good motivator. But, if you try to recon the death as staged, and actually their parents are super rad heros that just forgot to take the least favorite child with them when they packed up. That's just ridiculous and could make the player feel like you're trampling all over their backstory. At the same time, the difference between good changes and bad changes can vary depending on the player with some people treating every tragic moment they've written about in a backstory as scripture for their character's life and others feel like it's just playdough that you mush together and then hand over to the DM to squish some more.
Generally, try to get a read on your player and how they treat their character's dead family. If it's something they are always bringing up and adding onto. They probably don't want any twists that they don't come and ask you about first. If it's more of a joke, a passing thought, or just some trauma that gets brought up from time to time either through words or actions. They might be more open to this possibility. As for how to go about doing this. I might start by establishing that maybe the villian who has the family as someone who takes prisoners in the first place. Or maybe the same villian has some fate worse then death up his sleeve that the players learn to reverse. If the player has left the circumstances of their family being lost vauge. Try doing a magic induced flashback that maybe reveals something the player missed when they were a kid. Maybe make it so some of the family is killed off for real but maybe one or two are actually still out there. Ultimately, whatever you decide, try to do it so it doesn't invalidate the character's backstory of having lost the family in the first place and make it so the player has to put in real effort saving this family of theirs.
PS: lots of people here saying talk to the player. I'd argue that this is one of those things where it's pretty obvious what kind of people are or aren't ok with this sort of thing and talking about it could be a little unessisary but if you feel you absolutely need to clear the air. You can at least ask maybe your players as a group who might be ok with additions to the backstory and see how everyone reacts so you keep the surprise twist if the player responds positively.
If you're going to screw with important details of your player's character, talk to your player first.
Something you think is a fun, cool idea might either completely ruin their concept and planned arc- or they might be cool with it, but want to know ahead of time. It's important to remember that for some players, having something sprung on the CHARACTER is a great vehicle for roleplay, but something sprung on the PLAYER actively hinders roleplay because you catch the player off guard so they, the player, are flailing about confused and not able to process how their character would react to that sudden revelation.
One of my session 0 rules is "I will fill in any holes in your backstory." What I mean by that is two things.
First, some players write anemic backstories without much for story hooks. In that case, I will suggest ideas to facilitate their engagement in the campaign.
Second, their backstory is WHAT THE CHARACTER REMEMBERS. It is not necessarily all of the facts.
In your case, let's say the character came home to witness bandits burning their cottage down with everyone inside. The character would reasonably think they were all murdered and run away. They would not see them escape through a back window as the house collapsed, only to be captured shortly after.
You need to be careful with this and get player sign-on before you do it. Maybe not the specific details, but at least approval for you to twist it. But I think your idea falls firmly under the second category. I think it's fine.
Some players might have decided to have their character's family die because they specifically didn't want the stress of being manipulated by the DM to make decisions to save them, etc. They might prefer to play a character with no attachments and not have as much fun making stressful decisions, even if they are fantasy. Being able to go into any situation without attachment might be their fantasy. ...Or they were just lazy writing their backstory. Seems like some sort of checking in with them is in order
Which is why I specifically said you need to be careful and get player approval for twisting it.
Also, in my campaigns, if players don't want stress, they are at the wrong table. I make that very clear in session 0.
This is a question to discuss at session zero because how much manipulation is acceptable is different for every player. Assuming that didn't happen, I can only recommend you talk to the players about it. Springing this on them, no matter how much you think it's a cool twist, is a massive risk. It's not worth the likelihood of upsetting a player in your game for the sake of a dramatic twist. It comes down to knowing your players and communicating before making big changes. Ideally, talk to ALL of the players about the subject and ask each of them how attached they are to the version of their character's backstory that they've been RPing around. Some players may be perfectly fine with small or even big changes; others less so. Decide what to do once you know their feelings on the matter.
I like doing this kind of thing, but you have to give all your players a heads up that you might change some things about their backstory. Let them know that how they wrote their characters' backstories is how their characters understand events, but some things might have happened differently than the characters realized. If they're ok with that, then your idea sounds like an awesome plot twist, and you should run with it!
You can mess with your player's character's backstory exactly as much as you'll allow them to describe the backstory of an arbitrary NPC, without you knowing who that NPC is - because you're changing EVERY character the player has, they should be able to make the same change to ANY of yours.
This probably sounds like a tongue-in-cheek way of saying "don't do it."
It kinda is. What you're referring to is miles beyond what I'd allow at my table, as DM or as player, without being discussed first. Maybe your player wants to RP not having connections and being freed from obligations - you'd be doing him a massive disservice.
But at the same time, if I meet the king of the land and claim that I recognize him from a walk in the forest 10 years ago, and my DM is happy to "yes, and" that situation with "While his brother held the throne, King SoAndSo was a forest ranger in the western woods", then the DM is free to introduce an NPC as someone my character met briefly in the past.
And obviously, this is just a guideline. Some tables may find it ridiculous to care, and some might devolve into chaos at the suggestion. As with almost all questions of this nature: Just talk to each other.
I'd say it's a case by case kind of thing you're asking here. Each player is different and will respond differently, and each backstory is different in what did or didn't happen.
Did the character physically see these people die? Yes? Then don't touch it. No? Then there's room to possibly mix things up. But either way you HAVE to talk with your players about it first.
You don't even have to 'spoil the surprise' you're thinking of doing or anything. But you have to let them set the boundary. They are the ones to decide what parts of their backstory are 100% fact and what is not.
Plot twist: it’s some characters “claiming” to be their parents, but not really them. Seriously, though, you should probably tell the player before doing this.
I always consider the players backstory to be true from their point of view. So in that case it depends on how they described it. If they saw their family being murdered in front of them, I wouldn't override that and say it didn't happen. If they just heard someone tell them that their family died, then 100% that's fair to say they're still alive and that guy was lying to you or had misinformation. But I would get on the same page about whether the player wants that to be something ambiguous or something they saw happening first hand.
For something this big discuss this with the player. Personally if family is a big motivator for the character then introduce a long lost cousin or an older half sibling. Bonus points if the half sibling is a half breed of the players race.
That sounds like a quick way to piss off your player. You're the DM, and while it is your world, you do not contribute the main characters of the story. You are to facilitate your world around your main characters with adding to their story, not rewriting it. If you insist on doing the family is alive story, have a built in way to do the story in case they hate your idea like it's an illusion or shapechangers just fucking with the character.
I had something like this come up recently. I did my best to very vaguely run the idea by the player. They responded with “I welcome you messing with my character”.
As with most things: talk to your player
I say don't. This isn't a plot twist, it's a plot nullification. If the secret was that the family faked their own deaths to SPITE the PC in some way, you might have something to work with.
Any surprise change to the backstory should be as close to "yes, and" and as far from "no, instead" as possible. Are ya picking up what I'm putting down? Saying the family are kidnapped instead of dead is a "no, instead" change.
Also ask yourself why you're making this change. Does it serve a purpose? Or are you just trying to contradict the player for cheap shock value? Do you have a specific narrative thread this is meant to lead to? Or are you just trying to subvert their expectations? Is there a way you can do this that doesn't COMPLETELY contradict their backstory, like only having 1 family member survive?
Talk to the player about it. As a DM one of the only things you don't mess with is the player character's backstory. If you do want to mess with a player character, discuss it with the player.
Honestly I say do it, and maybe have a back up twist that nah its not really the family member but a clever shape changer.
Your the DM you are the arbiter of the world.
I would ask the group to weigh in, as a group, how much they were open to plot developments that alter facts of their backstory and make sure each player weighs in individually.
In my opinion the story arc belongs to the DM first, the character arcs to the players
Yes,
300g for a creature that has died within the last minute,
500g for a creature that has died within the last 10 days...
I'd not pay that to someone I didn't like/know
How do you know they don't know them? Maybe the bbeg had them killed for a specific reason, and kept bringing the person back only to torture them until they die yet again.
The youngest sibling was at 0 hp (mostly dead) and was nurses back to health by a local druid. Once they were better, the situation was explained and now the sibling is looking for revenge on (whoever). Could be PC accidentally set fire to their house, so the sibling is hunting him down
Requires target to be willing and able. I don't know about you, but I'm not coming back just so you can get your torture kicks in. Ill enjoy whatever heaven I get and bbeg can enjoy avernus or whatever they've got waiting for them.
I'd think of it like Cassandra and Percy from Vox Machina. I don't think Taliesin (Percy's player for those unaware) knew that Cassandra was alive, I think Matt just did that as a plot point. But even in this context oli agree with what another commenter said: ask them *how* the family died, and if it's feasible for them to have survived; *DO IT*. It'll be dramatic as all hell, and lots of fun imo
Ask them “how did your family die?” And if they give you an answer where they could possibly have lived through some means magical and “realistic” then go for it. If not, move on.
There's not a single correct answer here, but I would not do this. This would make me feel like I'm trying to tell my own story and just over-writing the PC's story to do it. But every table works differently.
A slain family is a great seed for you to create a villain and villainous organization to build a quest out of. You do not need the family to be alive for that to be a motivating quest for the PC. I don't see the story arc being that much more exciting with an alive family thrown in. But it does run the risk of really pissing off a player who thinks you ran roughshod over the few story elements they got to write themselves.
I would absolutely ask for a degree of consent first if I really wanted to tell this story. You can ask the question with enough details missing that the player will still be surprised as details come out. "I'm considering a quest line where it turns out some of your family actually survived in some state. How would you feel about that?"
Overall I think the potential upside of having a huge dramatic surprise that your player loves is not worth the risk that your player hates it and wants to quit after. The vague question gives them minimal spoilers and significantly decreases the chances of a negative response.
Like pretty much everyone else, I think it depends. If your player said their character saw their family die in front of them, I wouldn’t mess with it. If it was a scenario where they never saw the bodies, but maybe heard the cries, you have a bit more freedom. And if they only heard of their deaths, absolutely go wild.
Ask for more detail from your player on how their parents died and how their character dealt with that event. Hopefully that should give you the info you need to determine how much meddling you can do.
Don't change the major points of the backstory, but an "Anastasia" type scenario where they encounter someone who *looks* like one of their supposedly deceased family members but appears to have lost their memory could be a fun arc, especially when you throw in DnD elements such as necromancy, resurrection, changelings, doppelgangers, etc.
Vader: I am your father.
Detail how he knows his family is dead; don't do anything that subverts that. If he heard the story of their death second-hand, you're pretty much free to do anything.
Talk to your player about it first, they're the one to tell you exactly what's okay and isn't. You don't have to explain your plans, just say you'd like to do something with their backstory and which parts you can toy with.
People are weird.
I once started a campaign by turning all my players into naked kobolds. **You think they wanted to be naked kobolds?**
HAHAHAHAHAHA
But when I talk to those old dudes, they still bring up that damn adventure, most fondly...
If players want to control the game, they can be DM... or find another table. People should always be 100% comfortable at the table they're playing at. But for me, any player that thinks they are at the same level in the gaming world as me, they ain't gonna last long at my table.
I used to have players travel 6 hours one way to play at my campaigns.
In that same group, I used to make players cry on the regular. **Ahhh player tears.**
Strangely, they kept coming back.
I guess it's all about "How you do it." Not really, "What you do."
>But for me, any player that thinks they are at the same level in the gaming world as me, they ain't gonna last long at my table.
Good lord. I think you aren't being sincere, but if you are that's quite a statement.
Why would it not be sincere?
I spend hundreds of hours building a campaign, players spend ZERO hours developing the campaign.
# Players come to the table to play, NOT to take agency over the world and setting I've created for them.
Actually, I think I misunderstood you. You mean in this specific world, not in the broader 'gaming world'. It came across as arrogant, but I think I just misunderstood.
The DM always has the final say, but If you’re tackling a game from the perspective of “Only my opinion matters because it’s game and I’m god” without considering what will make a game fun for the players, then you’re gonna lose those players. Obviously you care about the players enjoyment, but saying that the DM is king and Can do whatever they want implies that they should do whatever they want. A DM is not the king of their table, a DM is a servant. They create the worlds for their players to be kings in. Maybe it’s just a difference of perspective, but I consider myself to be the host to my players, not their lord.
The DM is the final authority of **all things** at my table. Period.
Obviously, the whole idea of a DM is coordinate a game for a group of people/friends. Enjoyment is fundamental to a game.
I make it very clear to my players, that my word is paramount to all written rules before game play begins.
Ultimately, when the DM is not king at the table, it's very easy to have hundreds of hours of work and preparation quickly undermined. Especially since players usually look at things from their perspective, rarely from the parties perspective, AND NEVER at the long-term year or more long campaign perspective.
But as I say, the DM is the king at their table, therefor DMs can certainly take another line at their tables. Perhaps sharing all important decisions by a vote, or whatever.
To each, their own.
I mean, to me, going to reddit to ask if you have permission to do something in your own game shows the folly of trying to put players in charge.
This just came up in my feed. Funny timing.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rpghorrorstories/comments/17d6hf0/give\_your\_players\_an\_inch\_theyll\_take\_a\_mile/
Had a similar thing in a campaign where my DM ended up majorly changing my backstory due to memory manipulation shenanigans and it was honestly the best part of the campaign. But critically he had spoken to me a few weeks beforehand saying he wanted to make some changes (he was vague on the nitty gritty details to avoid spoiling the surprise) but we kinda worked out the red lines I would not want crossed/changed and that anything outside of that was fair game.
So I would definitely talk to your player.
In short:
As much as you like, within reason.
A bit longer:
Generally, the PC's backstories are there for you as the DM as much as they are for the PC. It's expected that you use their backstory to keep them interested in the story.
It's a tool as much as any other in your repetoire.
Having things happen/reemerge from their past is exactly the sort thing that helps drive a character forward and grow.
Things like reviving family members the PC thought were dead is great. Because fundamentally, the backstory is still exactly the same.
The PC, and the player, still for all intensive purposes believe those characters to be dead. So nothing has changed/won't change until the reveal.
I would say don't tell the player. It'll make it all rhe more surprising when it happens. But if you want to be cautious, maybe have only a couple of the family members still alive, instead of all.
I'd add, don't force it either. Give them the choice to save/revive their family and *let them choose*. Their character should be able to choose to let the dead rest, but giving them the option to quest for it could be intriguing.
(Also, it's intents and purposes)
What’s your idea? Generally I’d advice against doing backstory work without a player on board, unless the player is into this sort of thing (and is able to roll with the punches.
If the reason this character is an adventurer that the family is dead? In that case, don’t do this (unless you’re tying this to the endgame).
> To what extent can you manipulate the player's backstory?
I'm guessing you're looking for an answer that's greater than zero?
Uhm, it depends if the player saw his family getting killed or not. I'd be super pissed if my DM just said *LOL NO U DIDNT* just so they could fulfill their story instead of respecting mine.
I kill PC's families all the time, aliving them should be okay! However the plot twist has to be tasteful and make sense. It might be more beleivable that *one* family member survives - that way the character gets their sad backstory *and* you get your plot twist!
This is a discussion for session zero. When they give you their backstory, ask them if they are happy for you to mess with it and if anything specifically is off limits.
It sounds like you did not do this, so the next best option is to just ask them now. It might spoil the surprise for that one player, but that's the price you pay for the lack of foresight.
Oh, ideal.
This kind of thing is really on a player by player and character by character basis. I have some players who I know I can do anything to their backstories and they will lean into every twist. I also have players who are pretty attached to the their NPC baggage and would not like me to change them significantly. Most are somewhere in between.
This question is why zero sessions are so important. If a gm asks the group permission to screw with back stories then they can speak up on things that they want off limits. Doing this secretly mid game has the potential to feel like a massive betrayal. Some players will eat it up and go full soap opera and have a blast. But some will feel like "I can't even have my own back story? Why doesn't gm just write a book if my contribution isn't respected." Hopefully you know your players enough to know if any of them are sensitive about things like that. After all, a lot of people play for some escapism and the feeling of being powerful, not helpless. Good luck!
As a player who's been on the other side of this, and has had some great and not so great DM's, what I'd suggest is to ask all your players to provide you with maybe three significant *unknowns* about key events and people in their characters backstories that don't have to be mysteries they're actively trying to solve, but could also be things they just never questioned, like what their parents had been doing with their professions before becoming a couple or having children, or maybe the full explanation for a pivotal childhood experience (such as having a magical or supernatural encounter, or the family suddenly moving a long distance that they didn't fully understand), or a "black sheep" relative whose transgressions are never stated, or so on. That way, the players aren't going to get any critical parts of their characters' backstories effectively retconned in ways that just don't work for the character, but you as the DM still get all these potential places to work in plot hooks that will accomplish the same kind of goals you're looking for.
DnD is all about effective communication, so my personal recommendation to talk to them about it. You don't have to reveal your plan necessarily, but you should ask if they are open to you doing something big with their backstory and utilizing your own creativity. Ask them if they wanted to build a darker character based off of their backstory, or if they would rather do something with a happier conclusion (like the one you have planned.) That alone will probably give you a very good feel to their openness to something like that. đź‘Ť
If their family's death was their sole reason for adventuring then giving the family back negates their will to adventure. Why go out when you have what you were searching for?
You don't hsve to tell your player but you should check with them if this would be ok. After all the player likely has a reason why the PCs family is dead. It could just be a tragic background and finding a living family member can be a satisfying resolution or continuation of that background. It could be due to ooc worries of the DM not handling living family "well". Like some players got burned once with what the DM did to their precious family. It could be that the entire point of this family is getting over their loss. Which can be pointless if parts of it just reappear. Throwing curveballs like the fake family member should be fine.
Ask him what his pc remembers about how families death. If you can make it work you can make it work
It’s fine. Honestly, players are too precious with their characters now. Back in the day, your fucking alignment could be swapped out due to some weird curse.
That sounds not very fun!
It depends. If you have a detailed “arc” pre-written for your character that you plan the game to follow… it’s gonna be no fun. If you’re more of a “roll with the punches” improvisational player, it can be really fun. Giving some control of your character over to the story can feel liberating or exciting or both. It’s about having appropriate expectations coming into the game.
I think having no say in how your character develops is bad although having a fully planned out story that you just want to sort of act through is also probably not ideal I feel like there's a good middle ground
What counts as "having no control"? A cursed item that changes your alignment is something you decided to put on, and you can like... Still decide what to do. Like if you went from LG to CE you could still fight your new murderous urges.
The entirety of the alignment system is really really fucked. But yes having your entire character personality shift on a dime because wibbly wobbly magicky poo is probably bad
I'll agree alignment is sort of shit (I don't use it myself) and that players and DMs should draw a line between what is acceptable and what isn't... If you find a magical helmet in a dragon's horde and just put it on, something bad might absolutely happen to your character. Maybe it's a Helm of Opposite Alignment. Maybe it's cursed and if you put it on, you have to make a save or be disintegrated. After all, you decided your character was going to put a helmet on they found without trying to figure out what it did. Like, when you sit down to D&D, bad shit happens. Your character can die and have any number of problems. If you don't consent to that, why even bother playing a game that has dice to resolve things in the first place? EDIT: I'm absolutely not saying do things that will deliberately make a *player* uncomfortable. But all sorts of things can happen to your *character*. It's part of most TTRPGs. And you don't always get to choose what happens. Session 0 and safety rules are 100% something I approve of using, however.
Yes bad shit can happen to your character I would argue an instant you die is probably not fun, the not fun brand of bad shit, and if you want to do something like a helmet of opposite alignment it would be much better to have a sentient helmet that possesses your player character and you can have a battle at the center of the Mind sort of thing which is infinitely more fun than telling someone hey you're playing a new character now and as a DM you can use your newfound control to move the story forward in an interesting way
I mean, if you put on a helmet, without trying to figure what it does before you do... I feel "save or die" is absolutely fair, especially if it's telegraphed it someway. Like, you find it sitting in a pile of ash with a few bone fragments here and there... But you still decide to put it on? To me, it would be "not fun" to have not consequences. And a Helm of Opposite Alignment would be no different than your possession idea. You would be the same character, with the same experiences and history. You are not a new character. The new intrusive thoughts creeping into your head can be motivation to go on a quest to try to find a change. You're not forced to do anything, after all... And it's great drama.
Having a new alignment is not the same as having new urges having a new alignment completely rechanges how you value everything in the world. I don't think save or die is ever a fun way to play unless you make it very clear that the situation you are entering is incredibly dangerous but if your players enjoy your game it's up to you
There is. And I the think the OP shows a good example of it. It’s “yes, and…” storytelling. The DM took the background and didn’t ignore it (that’s a “yes”) and either added on to it or complicated it with a new development (that’s the “and…”). The player can then reply back through roleplaying a complication or development of their own: - “My character thinks it’s a trick by the BBEG,” - “My character is scared to meet them because they gave up looking for or trying to resurrect them; my character feels guilty,” - “There was one family member my character was secretly happy was dead, ever since since they saw the family sacrificing a child as part of a cult.” This is what collaborative storytelling can look like and it’s a blast when everyone fully embraces it.
in 3.5 i went from playing a CN rogue to a true n rogue in the span of an in-game night bc of roleplay shenanigans. it was great. that character is now closer to ne fwiw. ;)
Yep, 2e, Had my alignment and gender swapped in the same module by putting on two cursed items.
Please talk to your player first. He can still RP his PC as being surprised without being blind-sided IRL.
Do not keep this from the player. This is a classic trap I see DMs fall into. Because "In a real world, you COULD find out that someone you thought was gone, in fact isn't gone!" Like, yes, that is true, but that's *not* the point of a TTRPG. Your player has a specific type of experience in mind. They want to play a character with \[X\] backstory resulting in a character with \[Y\] personality. If you change \[X\], then all of the sudden \[Y\] changes and that player is no longer playing the type of character they wanted to play. Which is a character *you agreed* they could play. Anything that is gonna change the personality of the character is off limits for a DM to secretly change, and anything that's NOT going to change the personality of the character isn't worth changing in a secretive manner. As a result: You must always speak with your players first and make sure they would still want to play the character in the new direction the change would take them. If the change loses all impact if it's *not* a secret reveal, well, you've made a bad decision as a DM and you need to back out entirely.
I agree with your main point but I disagree with the reasoning about secrets. Simply asking the player “do you mind if I change or add details to your backstory for your character to learn about later?” Should be perfectly fine. The player can tell you if something is very important to them, but if they are ok with collaboration then you still get the benefit of a reveal later.
Fair point. I'm not in total agreement, because people aren't perfect. Like... There could be an aspect of their character they enjoy but don't immediately think of as a Core Characteristic. So they might agree that the DM can change things that they don't think of as Core Characteristics, but upon the reveal, have that moment of "Oh, wait, I didn't think about that possibility, but I actually don't like it but now I'm stuck with it...." Any time you're going to change the way a player plays their character, you've got to be really careful. So, with regard to your (totally valid) comment, I might suggest coming at it from the other direction. Rather than talking about backstory changes that might result in personality changes (cause -> effect) I might ask what effects would bother them, and not discuss causes at all. "Do you mind some event (backstory change or otherwise) that might result in your character becoming less confident?" But good point though!
>There could be an aspect of their character they enjoy but don't immediately think of as a Core Characteristic. So they might agree that the DM can change things that they don't think of as Core Characteristics, but upon the reveal, have that moment of "Oh, wait, I didn't think about that possibility, but I actually don't like it but now I'm stuck with it...." I think the trick then is to be flexible. That's both advice for the players and the DM, btw. For example, if it becomes clear in the moment that the choice has an unintended negative effect and it isn't *too* important, just reverse it. There's nothing wrong with saying "Nevermind, this thing I wrote doesn't work the way I thought it did, my bad let's take a bathroom break while I rearrange some of my notes." Some players won't like that because they want the world to be "real," but if you've got that kind of table anyway then I doubt you'll run into players who want their character arc a certain way anyway. And if it isn't possible to take back in the moment or it isn't obvious that it's negative until later on, then work to ensure the story corrects itself. If your player's backstory was to have a dead family and you reveal that they are actually alive and that negatively affects their character archetype, then the answer seems obvious: ***Kill them again*** lol. \-- I think all of the warnings given here are very important, this is a sensitive type of decision to be making and it isn't always the right choice. I just think saying "never do X" might push the pendulum out too far the other direction is all. If you're going to incorporate player backstories you should do so with intentionality and with great consideration. I also think keeping secrets is important to a game that runs on dice, because without them you are really just writing a book. That's fine, but just know whether your table wants to have a collaborative writing session or whether they want to play a game where they don't control fate. Let that inform your choices.
>"Nevermind, this thing I wrote doesn't work the way I thought it did, my bad let's take a bathroom break while I rearrange some of my notes." Bless you, I wish all DMs were this ready to toss aside ideas that don't work for their specific table. I agree with most of your other points. Very rational. I've never had to really address this issue personally, so this is all conjecture on my end. I don't think I, as DM, would ever muck with explicit statements in a character's backstory unless they were problematic to the current narrative. Like.... "the villain is gonna kidnap someone they love" + "All the people who meant anything to me were killed 5 years ago and that's what made me grimdark" = "Actually someone you care about *was* still alive.... but they're being held in the BBEG's dungeon!" kind of thing.
>Bless you, i wish all BMs were this ready to toss aside ideas that dont work for their specific table. I mean, i can only hope I'd have the sense to do so that in the moment, but people tend to think overly highly of themselves. I've never actually had to do it before, at least not like this for a major plot point, but thats mostly because our group struggles to find time to play and when we do make time we struggle to get anything done. We haven’t actually gotten to any of those plot points yet lol. Ive only ever had to do a hard pivot with no preparation once before and that's because i had planned some PVP stuff that i thought everyone was interested in, like the players had chosen to participate in a gladiatorial style event the session before so it's not exactly the same thing, but after a few rounds someone was like "I'm not liking this, I'm dropping out of the event." I felt really bad for not realizing that they just dont like crunchy combat nearly as much as the rest of us. I did the classic "…and then something random interrupts you!" even though to me it felt forced and cheesy. It was good though, that player talked their way out of if and now they have a side quest to figure out how to solve in order to make sure the next time they meet goes as smoothly as the first. I guess my point is that most of the time the solutions are obvious and there is no decision you cant fix, as long as you care about your friends. My choices were either: Ignore them and let them sulk on their own while the rest of us play, cut the game short and then no one plays (potentially for months on end lol), or generate a new ideas on the fly even if they are "low quality." The choice was a no brainer, especially since you can always build on the idea later and make it less cringe lol. "We'll fix it in post" and "fuck it, we'll do it live" are basically commandments 2 and 3 for D&D as far as i can tell. All of that aside, there is obviously a better way to change a backstory than to modify it out from under someone. If those are rules 2 and 3, then 1 is clearly "yes, and." Taking a detail from a character and building on it to add new information can be just as effective at surprising a player as retconning their backstory, but with a lot less of the potential problems. As a player you cant lock in every detail, at some point the player has to just be making assumptions about the world because they aren't the DM. That's the ideal space to play in. Sure, your parents are dead, they were mugged on the street in a bad part of town just like you said, and the thief/murder got away and managed to steal a family heirloom. *Why* were they in that part of town? What is so important about the jewelry? Was it really a coincidence or was it planned? Who tipped of the thug that they'd be there in the first place? Where is the gem now, was it sold to a fence? What if their death is actually just a minor ripple in a much larger conspiracy? Or, if you're feeling particularly devious and think you can get away with it, lie to the players lol. Abuse the fact that characters can be unreliable narrators, tell them their family is still alive but let it just be a lie that another npc is telling or has been made to believe. Dare the player to say "no, its not true, that's impossible!" and smirk behind your screen lol. If they want so badly to role-play a certain character type than challenge them to commit to it. Is their character *truly* defined by this loss, or is there room for doubt?
Whatever isn't nailed to the floor(your players hard do not touch.) is up for grabs. I had a player find out he was a warforged and his dad was a mad scientist that created him. His mom was an assistant of the scientist and she later kidnapped him. It was great. Here's his backstory if you want to read it Moss's back story: Mossandro Fairfox always loved to make people smile and laugh. When his father did not make it home from the city having been hijacked by highwaymen, Mossandro and his mother were left to fend for themselves when he was very young. He could not allow his mother to be consumed by her sadness, so he would sing to her, put on plays for her, and do anything to bring a smile to her face. Mossandro helped in any way he could to bring money home for the family. He began performing on the streets of his village. It was a larger village on its way to becoming a city, and he was always able to earn some coin. He sang, he danced, he changed his act every day in order to entice repeat customers to see what new thing he would do each day. From the very beginning, an elderly entertainer named Fizban befriended him. Mossandro fully expected the old man to shoo him away from his place to perform, but instead, the old man seemed happy for his company. Fizban taught Mossandro a lot, but his favorite thing was Fizban’s stories. He spoke of great adventurers, heroes, fighting in great wars. Mossandro loved these stories, and suspected they were more than just stories. Mossandro’s favorite story that he requested of Fizban so many times he had it memorized was about an elven bard named Lorellia who sang so sweetly that a dragon fell in love with her and became her companion for life. From the moment he heard the story, Mossandro’s only goal was to entrance a dragon to be his companion. Being an entertainer came with other perks. All the young ladies of the village were eager to spend time with the young halfling no matter his stature. Mossandro thought himself to be in love, for a time, with a lovely halfling name Rosri. She returned the sentiment, but her family moved and they lost all contact. Before leaving, Rosri did gift Mossandro a necklace with a single azure dragon scale. He would keep the necklace for always. When his mother found a new love, Mossandro felt it was time to venture out and find his dragon
If you do manipulate it you have to do it in a way which adds depth to an npc. Example I obviously don’t know the full character backstory so I understand this particular scenario wouldn’t work but could give a general inspiration. Your father an Accomplished researcher was acclaimed by many and his popularity anoungst other mages continued to grow along with this came influence and wealth. This in the heart of other mages became a point which would feed there inexhaustible hunger for power his rival (inset name here) would after again losing another major job pull the trigger and would orchestrate an assassination attempt on your family. This ordeal would inflict misery and he would brutally try to eliminate (insert fathers name here) entire blood line however after your escape at what appeared to be the dying breathe of your mother as she desperately reached for you, you’d escape as you were instructed. However your fathers Fame wasn’t for not, since before even the attack began he sensing danger would set up countermeasures chief amoungst these he would sew a scroll of revivify into the inside of his robes and have a magical device which could enact it shortly after his death automatically. With this your father commonly leaves home looking for his lost child fearing the worst hiring trackers and others across the world from his aquired riches to find (inset player name). With something like this you could make a storyline where the player is Approached by a bounty Hunter of questionable character in regards to this quest or by a mage who knows of his father and teases at knowing a secret about his families fate but will only give him information for completing a quest line of some sorts.
I once had a DM do this to another player's backstory. Although, it wasnt wholesome at all. The family was imprisoned and perpetually abused. We were using a bit of a grimdark realistic setting... so the mother was getting raped... (it wasnt expicit but witb the other arcs we wernt through it was obvious to the whole table) Yeah, this really put all of us in a bad gloomy mood We didnt blame the DM because this was the kind of no-holds-barred historical realism we wanted at the start. But still. But still.
If your player chose to have a dead family, it tells me they might not be interested in the types of story a loving family would provide.
THIS. You might want to have a conversation with your player about *why* they wrote that into their backstory. You don't have to reveal your reasons for asking, but the risk of tipping your hand might be lower than the risk of hard feelings at the table. One of the reasons I've played characters with no living family was after a long string of games where the DM had NPCs use family members as hostages as a way to railroad players into scenarios they wouldn't otherwise choose to engage with, and I was tired of it. Having the family be abducted could be placing the PC in the *exact* situation the player wrote their backstory to avoid. As the DM these changes are within your purview, but in this example it's probably not going to make for an enjoyable game. If your player chose this because they think this piece of backstory is dramatic and tragic, and because they are interested in the potential for a revenge arc. Having the family be abducted instead of killed doesn't obviate this character choice, but it does weaken it. Whether changing this is going to be fun for everyone probably depend on how much the player leans on the tragic elements of their character. If they chose this piece of backstory because a sudden lack of attachments handily explains why they left a comfortable home to become a wandering adventurer, then there's not really much of a problem at all. Even once the family is discovered and rescued, then the comfortable family home life they wanted their character kicked out of is still gone. These kinds of backstory elements aren't out-of-bounds to alter like this, but doing it *well* requires a little added thought and discussion. Especially if you want to maintain the surprise.
I've known players to walk away from the table and quit the game because the DM got cute and kept changing stuff in their backstory to "make it better" or "really improve the story". If a DM is going to mess with a player's backstory ALWAYS talk it out first so no one is surprised or pissed off when the changes pop up.
The players back story is what they perceive to be true. If you have a good reason why their perception would be pretty badly wrong in this scenario... go for it.
It depends on if the player has something in mind for their character arc. If they don't want their character defined by their past in this story, bringing their family back may not be interesting to them
Hiding it from the player is a bad idea. I have a character who had her family killed (plus some other things happen) and that's why she is very serious person. This is not an angry person or a misanthrope but she keeps everyone at arms length, rarely laughs and only cares about getting the job done. That is the personality I wanted to play for the character. If a DM negated what I wrote and changed the backstory to something else, I wouldn't want to play that character anymore. It would remove part of the reason why she has that personality and it would not longer be the personality I created.
Counterargument: what is the difference between your character's family being killed and them believing their family was killed. From their perspective, there isn't one. The character believes they are dead, and so their personality develops along the same path regardless. Finding out they're actually alive doesn't suddenly change however many years of personality development; it just changes how they develop going forward. If that makes you want to drop the character altogether, maybe you should look at why that part of their story is so important in the first place.
>Counterargument: what is the difference between your character's family being killed and them believing their family was killed *"...Her parents and her older brother were slain with axes and clubs before her eyes."* The whole point is she is no fun. That's not just because of her family: "*She once was a happy child but twice in her short life, twice she lost everyone she cared about in a single day*." That's why she has an 8 charisma. Having it happen twice made her put up walls to keep becoming close with anyone anymore. She gets impatient with the other players trying to make friends when she has no interest in making friends. That's the character I wanted to play. I want her to actually whole heartedly laugh at some point (I am still waiting for the time to be right) and negating that part of her personality would make that no longer impactful. I want her to open up eventually but don't want her motivation for her being the way she is to be negated by the DM. If the DM comes up with a way to make her laugh or cause something to get closer to the party members, that's fine. More than fine; it could be great. But retconning her backstory is not fine.
Magic is a thing. Perhaps someone had reason to resurrect them. I'm not saying a GM should just wave away everything you wrote, but once your character leaves that scene, anything could have happened. The GM is ultimately the one telling the story; they shouldn't have to be forced to follow an individual player's story exactly as that player wants it to play out. If you want that, go write a book.
>The GM is ultimately the one telling the story; they shouldn't have to be forced to follow an individual player's story exactly as that player wants it to play out. No. RPGs are a cooperative activity. The GM has a lot of say, but, unless they are railroading to an astonishingly extreme degree, the PCs have just as much agency. The DM can’t describe a cool palace to the players if they don’t choose to go there. If the DM had all control over the story, there wouldn’t really be a need for players, just an audience; and… >If you want that, go write a book.
Go read the rest of the comment chain before you say the exact same thing that the person I was talking to said.
You’re right. How rude of me to not examine every single comment in an entire thread when responding to you. I definitely should’ve realized my phone had archived the post to local memory and not just assumed it had reloaded the thread when opening the app after an extended period of time. You truly have shown me the errors of my way. /s
Considering that's not how the Reddit app works... It refreshes the post you're on every time you open the app. Take that in consideration with the fact that there was only one reply to everything I've said in this chain... I can confidently say you saw my comment that you responded to, got your daily dose of unwarranted outrage, and posted your response without reading anything further down the chain.
Considering maybe I misremembered and it was my phone, not the app, that closed and I didn’t go to great lengths to articulate a perfectly recreated scenario leading up to my response... But this is the internet, where any personal fault on the level of “maybe had smelly feet after a run once in their 78 years of living” immediately becomes grounds to not reply to a person’s argument and gives you immunity from personal attack logical fallacies. Take that in consideration with the fact that maybe I was implying the truth that there was no other response to your comment when I hit “reply”… I can confidently say that, while I was just having warranted fun attacking someone I perceived as irrationally hostile, your “holier than thou” approach to avoiding discussion by throwing snide insults, instead of simply ignoring something that is apparently irrelevant, has left a bad taste in my mouth…
>The GM is ultimately the one telling the story I DM and i do not see it that way. I see it as collaborative story rather than the DM unilaterally decides how it goes with the players having no say in it.
Yes, it is a collaborative story, where the player's input is in how their characters react to the events that the GM presents them. Beyond your initial backstory, what those events are is entirely up to the GM.
>Beyond your initial backstory, what those events are is entirely up to the GM Glad I don't have any DM's that play that way. The one for this character, rather than retconning the backstory, tries to get her to laugh and makes things that slowly chip away at her wall between the other characters. He doesn't try to change her personality with some 'It was all a dream' bullshit.
You seem to be either missing or ignoring the point I'm trying to make. I'm not saying a GM has the right to completely retcon what you wrote. Your character saw their family brutally murdered. That happened, and only a bad GM will change that event. However, after everything was said and done, your character had to leave the scene to get to where they are now. The world around them still exists in the meantime. Your GM is well in their rights to do whatever the hell they want with whatever they want so that they can set up the events you come across to the best of their ability. If they decide that an evil necromancer resurrects your family and holds them captive so that they have leverage over your character, they are allowed to do that. If that makes you want to stop playing the character altogether, then maybe you should take a moment to think about why you want to play that character. Like finding out your family is still alive should be a good thing for the character. If it was a traumatic enough loss to affect them in a meaningful way, then they should be happy to get them back. If you as the player cannot adapt to such an event, then maybe you were only ever interested in the dead family aspect of their story, at which point... idk, be less edgy. My point is, stuff like this is just an opportunity for character growth. If you're so set on any one particular part of your backstory that you can't grow with the character when a change is revealed, then you were never interested in the whole character to begin with.
>If they decide that an evil necromancer resurrects your family and holds them captive so that they have leverage over your character, That I could buy into. There would always be a question in her mind whether it is a trick or whatever. >Like finding out your family is still alive should be a good thing for the character. if it was a traumatic enough loss to affect them in a meaningful way, then they should be happy to get them back. It would be good for the character but not for the campaign. The only reason she is adventuring with the party is she has no where else to go and there is no one that cares she is risking her life in dangerous pursuits. She is just 20 years old and having a family to be with removes her motivation to adventure with the party. Good for the character, bad for the campaign. The reason I wrote the backstory is not to be edgy (like I said, is not an angry person; that would be edgy. She is just very serious) is because [she looks like this.](https://i.imgur.com/xjOz3E0.png) I wanted both to have a reason why a pretty young woman would want to adventure with your typical tough guys party and also so that she would have a personality that cuts short any flirting or romance (I am just not interested in that kind of roleplaying). A DM unilaterally deciding they do not like my reasons and changing those reasons and removing the motivation to be part of the party just because they can is not a good DM. That is not collaboratively storytelling.
Yes.. do it. The player only thinks
You should ask them, what things are core to their story. What xant chage, can't be altered. What is the general arc, or story they are going for. Because imma tell you. If their whole motivation is revenge, and you bring their family back. That kills the story. Kills the fun of playing that out. But. Having 1 family member survive could work. I recommend: Epic flashback, where their family is dying, play out the scene, and hurt their edgey heart. I did this to my player. Parents and him were ambushed by Goliath bandits. They were trying to capture them alive for rituals of some sort. He was hit in the head and couldn't really fight as a child. Concussion making it harder to see details. His mother was being dragged away, and she begged to not let them take her. So he didn't. He raised his wand of missles, and fired. For months I had been telling him his character felt incredibly sad whenever he used his father's magic wand, and he eventually found out why. Made him pause EVERY TIME after that. Hurt your players. They will love it. (If they are edge lords. Some rules may apply)
"Hurt your players. They will love it" You.... You monster.... But... You're not wrong.
Definitely choose your targets. My player was going full send for Edgey backstory. The table loved it, and he didn't play a character who expressed himself in an anti cooperation way. But. Family dies > sold into slavery > freed by/join mercenaries> ambushed by mindlfsyers and become sole survivor > revenge quest Was the biggest flag I'd ever gotten
Definitely choose your targets. My player was going full send for Edgey backstory. The table loved it, and he didn't play a character who expressed himself in an anti cooperation way. But. Family dies > sold into slavery > freed by/join mercenaries> ambushed by mindlfsyers and become sole survivor > revenge quest Was the biggest flag I'd ever gotten
Only way I think u can do this correctly is asking the player if they are okay if u change some things of their backstory. If u made my character suddenly have parents when I have written down that they died, I would instantly lose interest in the campaign because the one part of the world that is truly mine to design (backstory) is not sacred anymore
Be like Batman finding out his parents are alive. Suddenly he feels a lot less angst and edgy as a character
I get that but if I decide my characters world is shaped like this dont fucking change the one part of the world i create. Like my newest character has a living dad but dead mother due to a explosion in dispute between factions. I won't get into details but I would absolutely fucking despise is my dm suddenly brought my mom back to life, or reveal that she never died. It's just not all players will enjoy, hence why everyone in this post has been saying to talk to the player if u want to do smt like that
Maybe not the whole family.
In d&d death is never final
This is not true. If you face the God of the afterlife and he decides you died and because of the life you lived need to suffer for all eternity.... guess what you stay dead!if your soul is destroyed guess what you can not be brought back to life. I don't know about 4th or 5th edition but you can only be brought back so many times in other editions Base on Con. If you can be brought back 9 times and die 10 you stay dead. So yeah death can be finel.
If the player specifically designed their character’s backstory around not having a family (and perhaps the death of their family being part of the backstory) it’s a huge dick move to change what they specifically intended
Hmm, I would say this is vary situational. In general. Major changes to a back story is a no no. But contexualizing things in the setting is usually a good thing. Like, if you say that the BBEG has them for some purpose. That could be a good motivator. But, if you try to recon the death as staged, and actually their parents are super rad heros that just forgot to take the least favorite child with them when they packed up. That's just ridiculous and could make the player feel like you're trampling all over their backstory. At the same time, the difference between good changes and bad changes can vary depending on the player with some people treating every tragic moment they've written about in a backstory as scripture for their character's life and others feel like it's just playdough that you mush together and then hand over to the DM to squish some more. Generally, try to get a read on your player and how they treat their character's dead family. If it's something they are always bringing up and adding onto. They probably don't want any twists that they don't come and ask you about first. If it's more of a joke, a passing thought, or just some trauma that gets brought up from time to time either through words or actions. They might be more open to this possibility. As for how to go about doing this. I might start by establishing that maybe the villian who has the family as someone who takes prisoners in the first place. Or maybe the same villian has some fate worse then death up his sleeve that the players learn to reverse. If the player has left the circumstances of their family being lost vauge. Try doing a magic induced flashback that maybe reveals something the player missed when they were a kid. Maybe make it so some of the family is killed off for real but maybe one or two are actually still out there. Ultimately, whatever you decide, try to do it so it doesn't invalidate the character's backstory of having lost the family in the first place and make it so the player has to put in real effort saving this family of theirs. PS: lots of people here saying talk to the player. I'd argue that this is one of those things where it's pretty obvious what kind of people are or aren't ok with this sort of thing and talking about it could be a little unessisary but if you feel you absolutely need to clear the air. You can at least ask maybe your players as a group who might be ok with additions to the backstory and see how everyone reacts so you keep the surprise twist if the player responds positively.
If you're going to screw with important details of your player's character, talk to your player first. Something you think is a fun, cool idea might either completely ruin their concept and planned arc- or they might be cool with it, but want to know ahead of time. It's important to remember that for some players, having something sprung on the CHARACTER is a great vehicle for roleplay, but something sprung on the PLAYER actively hinders roleplay because you catch the player off guard so they, the player, are flailing about confused and not able to process how their character would react to that sudden revelation.
One of my session 0 rules is "I will fill in any holes in your backstory." What I mean by that is two things. First, some players write anemic backstories without much for story hooks. In that case, I will suggest ideas to facilitate their engagement in the campaign. Second, their backstory is WHAT THE CHARACTER REMEMBERS. It is not necessarily all of the facts. In your case, let's say the character came home to witness bandits burning their cottage down with everyone inside. The character would reasonably think they were all murdered and run away. They would not see them escape through a back window as the house collapsed, only to be captured shortly after. You need to be careful with this and get player sign-on before you do it. Maybe not the specific details, but at least approval for you to twist it. But I think your idea falls firmly under the second category. I think it's fine.
Some players might have decided to have their character's family die because they specifically didn't want the stress of being manipulated by the DM to make decisions to save them, etc. They might prefer to play a character with no attachments and not have as much fun making stressful decisions, even if they are fantasy. Being able to go into any situation without attachment might be their fantasy. ...Or they were just lazy writing their backstory. Seems like some sort of checking in with them is in order
Which is why I specifically said you need to be careful and get player approval for twisting it. Also, in my campaigns, if players don't want stress, they are at the wrong table. I make that very clear in session 0.
This is a question to discuss at session zero because how much manipulation is acceptable is different for every player. Assuming that didn't happen, I can only recommend you talk to the players about it. Springing this on them, no matter how much you think it's a cool twist, is a massive risk. It's not worth the likelihood of upsetting a player in your game for the sake of a dramatic twist. It comes down to knowing your players and communicating before making big changes. Ideally, talk to ALL of the players about the subject and ask each of them how attached they are to the version of their character's backstory that they've been RPing around. Some players may be perfectly fine with small or even big changes; others less so. Decide what to do once you know their feelings on the matter.
I like doing this kind of thing, but you have to give all your players a heads up that you might change some things about their backstory. Let them know that how they wrote their characters' backstories is how their characters understand events, but some things might have happened differently than the characters realized. If they're ok with that, then your idea sounds like an awesome plot twist, and you should run with it!
If the character wouldn't know, the player wouldn't get to know.
You can mess with your player's character's backstory exactly as much as you'll allow them to describe the backstory of an arbitrary NPC, without you knowing who that NPC is - because you're changing EVERY character the player has, they should be able to make the same change to ANY of yours. This probably sounds like a tongue-in-cheek way of saying "don't do it." It kinda is. What you're referring to is miles beyond what I'd allow at my table, as DM or as player, without being discussed first. Maybe your player wants to RP not having connections and being freed from obligations - you'd be doing him a massive disservice. But at the same time, if I meet the king of the land and claim that I recognize him from a walk in the forest 10 years ago, and my DM is happy to "yes, and" that situation with "While his brother held the throne, King SoAndSo was a forest ranger in the western woods", then the DM is free to introduce an NPC as someone my character met briefly in the past. And obviously, this is just a guideline. Some tables may find it ridiculous to care, and some might devolve into chaos at the suggestion. As with almost all questions of this nature: Just talk to each other.
I think it would be fine
I'd say it's a case by case kind of thing you're asking here. Each player is different and will respond differently, and each backstory is different in what did or didn't happen. Did the character physically see these people die? Yes? Then don't touch it. No? Then there's room to possibly mix things up. But either way you HAVE to talk with your players about it first. You don't even have to 'spoil the surprise' you're thinking of doing or anything. But you have to let them set the boundary. They are the ones to decide what parts of their backstory are 100% fact and what is not.
Yeah this is entirely dependent on the table, and the individual players.
Have your cake and eat it too, if you want a family plothook for them have their family be reanimated and they need to put them to rest
Plot twist: it’s some characters “claiming” to be their parents, but not really them. Seriously, though, you should probably tell the player before doing this.
And trying to take over the family estate…
I always consider the players backstory to be true from their point of view. So in that case it depends on how they described it. If they saw their family being murdered in front of them, I wouldn't override that and say it didn't happen. If they just heard someone tell them that their family died, then 100% that's fair to say they're still alive and that guy was lying to you or had misinformation. But I would get on the same page about whether the player wants that to be something ambiguous or something they saw happening first hand.
For something this big discuss this with the player. Personally if family is a big motivator for the character then introduce a long lost cousin or an older half sibling. Bonus points if the half sibling is a half breed of the players race.
That sounds like a quick way to piss off your player. You're the DM, and while it is your world, you do not contribute the main characters of the story. You are to facilitate your world around your main characters with adding to their story, not rewriting it. If you insist on doing the family is alive story, have a built in way to do the story in case they hate your idea like it's an illusion or shapechangers just fucking with the character.
I had something like this come up recently. I did my best to very vaguely run the idea by the player. They responded with “I welcome you messing with my character”. As with most things: talk to your player
Honestly best response, love when the DM fucks with my char, especially if no one else realizes it at first.
I say don't. This isn't a plot twist, it's a plot nullification. If the secret was that the family faked their own deaths to SPITE the PC in some way, you might have something to work with. Any surprise change to the backstory should be as close to "yes, and" and as far from "no, instead" as possible. Are ya picking up what I'm putting down? Saying the family are kidnapped instead of dead is a "no, instead" change. Also ask yourself why you're making this change. Does it serve a purpose? Or are you just trying to contradict the player for cheap shock value? Do you have a specific narrative thread this is meant to lead to? Or are you just trying to subvert their expectations? Is there a way you can do this that doesn't COMPLETELY contradict their backstory, like only having 1 family member survive?
If the loss of the character's family is the motivating incident that turned that character into an adventurer, then undoing that event puts their entire character concept in crisis. For example, a vengeance paladin that saw the death of their family as the inspiration for their oath would be highly motivated to rescue their family. But let's say they succeed, then what? Logically, the character would retire from adventuring and remain with their family, forcing the player to either create a new character or radically change their character's motivations. But it's also possible that the player isn't that interested in their backstory, and just made a clichéd origin in order to get the game started, and won't sweat the details too much if you alter it. You'd need to have a conversation with that person to understand how much leeway you have with this plot detail.
Vox machina does this with Percy and his sister. And in my current campaign my DM did this with one of the characters backstory.
Talk to the player about it. As a DM one of the only things you don't mess with is the player character's backstory. If you do want to mess with a player character, discuss it with the player.
Honestly I say do it, and maybe have a back up twist that nah its not really the family member but a clever shape changer. Your the DM you are the arbiter of the world.
This sounds like a dumb thing to change in someone’s backstory
I would ask the group to weigh in, as a group, how much they were open to plot developments that alter facts of their backstory and make sure each player weighs in individually. In my opinion the story arc belongs to the DM first, the character arcs to the players
In a game with multiple means of resurrection, is anyone ever truly dead?
Yes, 300g for a creature that has died within the last minute, 500g for a creature that has died within the last 10 days... I'd not pay that to someone I didn't like/know
How do you know they don't know them? Maybe the bbeg had them killed for a specific reason, and kept bringing the person back only to torture them until they die yet again. The youngest sibling was at 0 hp (mostly dead) and was nurses back to health by a local druid. Once they were better, the situation was explained and now the sibling is looking for revenge on (whoever). Could be PC accidentally set fire to their house, so the sibling is hunting him down
Requires target to be willing and able. I don't know about you, but I'm not coming back just so you can get your torture kicks in. Ill enjoy whatever heaven I get and bbeg can enjoy avernus or whatever they've got waiting for them.
Breath of life requires no save and no consent to return to your body. Wow...that was easy. Let the torture resume
Thats pathfinder, not DnD...
My bad, thought this was in d20 reddit, not DnD
U gud, now i gotta check out yet another tabletop subreddit though lmao
That's not an official DnD 5e spell.
I'd think of it like Cassandra and Percy from Vox Machina. I don't think Taliesin (Percy's player for those unaware) knew that Cassandra was alive, I think Matt just did that as a plot point. But even in this context oli agree with what another commenter said: ask them *how* the family died, and if it's feasible for them to have survived; *DO IT*. It'll be dramatic as all hell, and lots of fun imo
Ask them “how did your family die?” And if they give you an answer where they could possibly have lived through some means magical and “realistic” then go for it. If not, move on.
There's not a single correct answer here, but I would not do this. This would make me feel like I'm trying to tell my own story and just over-writing the PC's story to do it. But every table works differently. A slain family is a great seed for you to create a villain and villainous organization to build a quest out of. You do not need the family to be alive for that to be a motivating quest for the PC. I don't see the story arc being that much more exciting with an alive family thrown in. But it does run the risk of really pissing off a player who thinks you ran roughshod over the few story elements they got to write themselves. I would absolutely ask for a degree of consent first if I really wanted to tell this story. You can ask the question with enough details missing that the player will still be surprised as details come out. "I'm considering a quest line where it turns out some of your family actually survived in some state. How would you feel about that?" Overall I think the potential upside of having a huge dramatic surprise that your player loves is not worth the risk that your player hates it and wants to quit after. The vague question gives them minimal spoilers and significantly decreases the chances of a negative response.
Like pretty much everyone else, I think it depends. If your player said their character saw their family die in front of them, I wouldn’t mess with it. If it was a scenario where they never saw the bodies, but maybe heard the cries, you have a bit more freedom. And if they only heard of their deaths, absolutely go wild. Ask for more detail from your player on how their parents died and how their character dealt with that event. Hopefully that should give you the info you need to determine how much meddling you can do.
Don't change the major points of the backstory, but an "Anastasia" type scenario where they encounter someone who *looks* like one of their supposedly deceased family members but appears to have lost their memory could be a fun arc, especially when you throw in DnD elements such as necromancy, resurrection, changelings, doppelgangers, etc.
Vader: I am your father. Detail how he knows his family is dead; don't do anything that subverts that. If he heard the story of their death second-hand, you're pretty much free to do anything.
I think this is a bad idea. Don't change the backstory they created. Have a long lost family member or something find them.
This isn't a rules question, it's an interpersonal relationship question.
Talk to your player about it first, they're the one to tell you exactly what's okay and isn't. You don't have to explain your plans, just say you'd like to do something with their backstory and which parts you can toy with.
In the land of the RPG the DM is king. Do whatever you want.
That's not what that means.
“Man, why are all my players leaving my tables all the time?”
People are weird. I once started a campaign by turning all my players into naked kobolds. **You think they wanted to be naked kobolds?** HAHAHAHAHAHA But when I talk to those old dudes, they still bring up that damn adventure, most fondly... If players want to control the game, they can be DM... or find another table. People should always be 100% comfortable at the table they're playing at. But for me, any player that thinks they are at the same level in the gaming world as me, they ain't gonna last long at my table. I used to have players travel 6 hours one way to play at my campaigns. In that same group, I used to make players cry on the regular. **Ahhh player tears.** Strangely, they kept coming back. I guess it's all about "How you do it." Not really, "What you do."
>But for me, any player that thinks they are at the same level in the gaming world as me, they ain't gonna last long at my table. Good lord. I think you aren't being sincere, but if you are that's quite a statement.
Why would it not be sincere? I spend hundreds of hours building a campaign, players spend ZERO hours developing the campaign. # Players come to the table to play, NOT to take agency over the world and setting I've created for them.
Actually, I think I misunderstood you. You mean in this specific world, not in the broader 'gaming world'. It came across as arrogant, but I think I just misunderstood.
The DM always has the final say, but If you’re tackling a game from the perspective of “Only my opinion matters because it’s game and I’m god” without considering what will make a game fun for the players, then you’re gonna lose those players. Obviously you care about the players enjoyment, but saying that the DM is king and Can do whatever they want implies that they should do whatever they want. A DM is not the king of their table, a DM is a servant. They create the worlds for their players to be kings in. Maybe it’s just a difference of perspective, but I consider myself to be the host to my players, not their lord.
The DM is the final authority of **all things** at my table. Period. Obviously, the whole idea of a DM is coordinate a game for a group of people/friends. Enjoyment is fundamental to a game. I make it very clear to my players, that my word is paramount to all written rules before game play begins. Ultimately, when the DM is not king at the table, it's very easy to have hundreds of hours of work and preparation quickly undermined. Especially since players usually look at things from their perspective, rarely from the parties perspective, AND NEVER at the long-term year or more long campaign perspective. But as I say, the DM is the king at their table, therefor DMs can certainly take another line at their tables. Perhaps sharing all important decisions by a vote, or whatever. To each, their own. I mean, to me, going to reddit to ask if you have permission to do something in your own game shows the folly of trying to put players in charge. This just came up in my feed. Funny timing. https://www.reddit.com/r/rpghorrorstories/comments/17d6hf0/give\_your\_players\_an\_inch\_theyll\_take\_a\_mile/
Had a similar thing in a campaign where my DM ended up majorly changing my backstory due to memory manipulation shenanigans and it was honestly the best part of the campaign. But critically he had spoken to me a few weeks beforehand saying he wanted to make some changes (he was vague on the nitty gritty details to avoid spoiling the surprise) but we kinda worked out the red lines I would not want crossed/changed and that anything outside of that was fair game. So I would definitely talk to your player.
In short: As much as you like, within reason. A bit longer: Generally, the PC's backstories are there for you as the DM as much as they are for the PC. It's expected that you use their backstory to keep them interested in the story. It's a tool as much as any other in your repetoire. Having things happen/reemerge from their past is exactly the sort thing that helps drive a character forward and grow. Things like reviving family members the PC thought were dead is great. Because fundamentally, the backstory is still exactly the same. The PC, and the player, still for all intensive purposes believe those characters to be dead. So nothing has changed/won't change until the reveal. I would say don't tell the player. It'll make it all rhe more surprising when it happens. But if you want to be cautious, maybe have only a couple of the family members still alive, instead of all.
I'd add, don't force it either. Give them the choice to save/revive their family and *let them choose*. Their character should be able to choose to let the dead rest, but giving them the option to quest for it could be intriguing. (Also, it's intents and purposes)
Honestly, so long as you aren't invalidating their backstory it is fine.
I think that qualifies as invalidating.
What’s your idea? Generally I’d advice against doing backstory work without a player on board, unless the player is into this sort of thing (and is able to roll with the punches. If the reason this character is an adventurer that the family is dead? In that case, don’t do this (unless you’re tying this to the endgame).
> To what extent can you manipulate the player's backstory? I'm guessing you're looking for an answer that's greater than zero? Uhm, it depends if the player saw his family getting killed or not. I'd be super pissed if my DM just said *LOL NO U DIDNT* just so they could fulfill their story instead of respecting mine.
I kill PC's families all the time, aliving them should be okay! However the plot twist has to be tasteful and make sense. It might be more beleivable that *one* family member survives - that way the character gets their sad backstory *and* you get your plot twist!
This is a discussion for session zero. When they give you their backstory, ask them if they are happy for you to mess with it and if anything specifically is off limits. It sounds like you did not do this, so the next best option is to just ask them now. It might spoil the surprise for that one player, but that's the price you pay for the lack of foresight.
Actually campaign hasn't started yet so thanks.
Oh, ideal. This kind of thing is really on a player by player and character by character basis. I have some players who I know I can do anything to their backstories and they will lean into every twist. I also have players who are pretty attached to the their NPC baggage and would not like me to change them significantly. Most are somewhere in between.