Help with my backstory - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Spekke- Oct 23, 2014 13:53:40	Like the title says I'm hoping for some feedback on my character's backstory. I've tried to create a character with an interesting flavor and some interesting backgroud elements. The big things I'm looing for is does this character seem "reasonable"? I'm trying to avoid making a superhero backstory where my character is th3 c00le$t. I'm also trying to make sure that he isn't one of those PCs that forces too much of his backstory onto the DM's campaign. Thanks for the feedback. Backstory: Epicure never would have amounted to much. He was the sixth son of a minor noble who had little enough to give to his wife and heir and no time for children after the first. Epicure took to spending much of his time among the servants, specifically the cook staff. When Epicure's father went off to tend to a minor border dispute with a cadre of followers he took two of his sons with him. The first was, of course, his heir and the second was Epicure who was tagging along with the cooks and other camp followers. Epicure served his father several times on that excursion and his father literally never realized that he had more than one of his sons with him.
#2 Varden_Khol Oct 23, 2014 16:35:10	Spekke- wrote:
#3 Bloodscythe Oct 24, 2014 7:23:13	I'm not seeing how a cannibal is a player character. Usually players create heroes with the PHB, not monsters. The backstory is definitely rich, but the character seems to be a sociopath, having cooked humans (his own kind) and then thinking it was a good idea to cook an unborn dragon for his dragon master (thus making his master a cannibal as well) and though it works well as an NPC, I don't see this being a playable character. Although, I have to ask: A) is he done cooking people? and B) what alignment are you going with? I'm also not sure why kobolds would allow a human to destroy a dragon, even an unborn dragon in an egg. They worship evil dragons (all evil dragons) as gods... they basically participated in the murder of a god, or in the very least the murder of a god's child. I like the imagination though.
#4 Spekke- Oct 24, 2014 8:27:36	Thank you so much for the feedback! @Varden_Khol Epicure has two principle reasons for adventuring. One is to stay a few steps ahead of the red dragon's lackeys- there aren't that many master chefs with a scattering of red scales. The other reason is that Epicure desperately wants to find that special dish that will get Rhittanitr (his former master) to accept him back. Now that kobolds aren't bringing him fancy magical beasties to cook he's got to do it himself. Adventuring also affords him the chance to experience new cuisines and ideas that might help him in this quest. As for connections to other party member, I agree this is a problem. My character is actually joining an ongoing campaign (at 3rd level) so I'm kind of at the mercy of the DM for where exactly I'm coming from. That's why I was trying to play a little fast and loose with the locations where everything took place. I'll talk with some of the other players (I was DMing so I already know quite a bit about their backstories) and see if they are interested in including a few tenuous connections though. @Bloodscythe I totally agree that Epicure has some sociopathic tendancies. I prefer to think of him more like someone who lies somewhere along the Autism spectrum though. While cooking humans is unquestionably an evil act, Epicure wasn't doing it because he wanted to taste human flesh or to fufill some dark need. Epicure did it because the only real praise he had ever heard was "good food." He already knew that the dragon was going to eat his dead compatriates, that ship had already sailed. In Epicure's twisted mind his job was just to make sure that it was "good food." This is really the core of Epicure's peculiar morailty, he feels an obligation to create quality food, especially those he cares about. He is certainly lacking the mental filters that say "these things ye shall not eat" but this is more of a facet of a slightly bent mindset than malevolence. This is the same reason he cooked the red dragon egg. It seemed like it would be "good food." What better ingredient for an omelette than the egg of the most powerful creature on the face of the planet? Especially if your master has explicitly charged you with finding foods that will increase his magical power. If Epicure was, like you or I, a well adjusted human being he should have immediately recognized that feeding the egg to his master was a BAD idea. But that's just not how I see Epicure viewing the matter. In response to your excellent questions: A) Epicure hasn't been totally impressed with the culinary potential of human meat. He is unlikely to do much more with them unless requested to do so. He's also not all that proud of the humans he cooked long ago. Epicure feels embarassed with the quality of those meals and has kind of avoided cooking human since in part because of that. Epicure also understands that "good food" isn't the same for everyone and would be unlikely to cook human in the presence of others who would not enjoy such a meal. It's possible that as Epicure adventures with those of good alignements he might also acquire some of their morality (As in "Human babies aren't basically the same thing as veal? Ok, let me write that down... what about halfling babies? Hm. Are you sure?") B) Alignment- Probably something in the neutral area leaning towards the good. I feel like the alignment system isn't particularly well suited to a character like this. I feel Epicure is basically a decent human being who is just oblivious of a few important pieces of morality. If you've read any Dragonlance imagine something similar to a kender. Epicure will generally try to do the right thing and help people who need him, he just doesn't really get the arbitrary "eating this is ok but eating this is evil" rules. As ofr the kobolds. I feel that Epicure and the kobolds had a kind of unique relationship with the local tribe. He had a long history of making odd requests that the kobolds didn't really get, but basically every request had eventually turned out well for the tribe. By the time Epicure asked for the egg the kobolds had a kind of cheerful bewilderment that meant they would typically do what he asked and then kind of stand back to see what would happen. The egg was one example of this. They really didn't know what he had in mind (or they would have let him know what a profoundly TERRIBLE idea it was) and so they just, you know, went along for the ride. While I agree that kobolds may see all dragons as gods, the red dragon wasn't THEIR god- Rhitannitr was. They had done very well under Rhitannitr's rule (gaining more magical might and vitality as Epicure created new doshes for all to share) and could easily have been ok with doing something another tribe might have hesitated to do. Thanks again for the feedback. I will mention both of your remarks to the DM/other players. Let me know if you think my responses would adequately address your questions/concerns or if something still doesn't quite sit right with you. Anyhting else?
#5 Noctaem Oct 24, 2014 8:51:09	@Bloodscythe I would seriously avoid dragging alignment into the discussion if I were you. No better way to derail the thread. As for the Op: I find your background to be well made. As a child you faced death at the hands of a massive dragon. However you managed to find a solution that allowed you to live and gain favor with said dragon. After that well, chalk it up to your character having some issues. Or maybe it was your subconscious which made you cook the egg and try to feed it to your master, the way he made you cook your own people. Who knows. Leaves things to the imagination. Anyway good job! Lots of hooks for the DM to play with. But I do have one word of caution, don't screw over the other players at your table just because "it's your RP" or "it's what my character would do". There's a social contract involved and your characters actions are a reflection of your agreement to that contract that everyone agrees to when they sit down at the table, DM included.
(Reply to #4) Bloodscythe	Spekke- wrote:
#7 sleypy Oct 24, 2014 11:20:25	I like that background. Without know anything about the campaign your joining there is really no way to judge what is reasonable, but I imagine it would be unless the setting lacking the monsters you mentioned or has a different take on them. I don't see anything wrong, but these are my suggestions. Your being a little too verbose in your character traits. You've got a good detailed background that contains all the important details. Because of that the traits doesn't need to to explain themselves, just act as a quick reference for you and the DM. Something like this: Wanted: A certain red dragon is very angry with me for stealing, and eating, his egg. His henchmen seek to find and kill me constantly to seek favor with their master. Could be just this: "Wanted by a vengeful dragon and his minions over a poached egg"

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Spekke-

Oct 23, 2014 13:53:40

Like the title says I'm hoping for some feedback on my character's backstory. I've tried to create a character with an interesting flavor and some interesting backgroud elements. The big things I'm looing for is does this character seem "reasonable"? I'm trying to avoid making a superhero backstory where my character is th3 c00le$t. I'm also trying to make sure that he isn't one of those PCs that forces too much of his backstory onto the DM's campaign. Thanks for the feedback.

Backstory:

Epicure never would have amounted to much. He was the sixth son of a minor noble who had little enough to give to his wife and heir and no time for children after the first. Epicure took to spending much of his time among the servants, specifically the cook staff. When Epicure's father went off to tend to a minor border dispute with a cadre of followers he took two of his sons with him. The first was, of course, his heir and the second was Epicure who was tagging along with the cooks and other camp followers. Epicure served his father several times on that excursion and his father literally never realized that he had more than one of his sons with him.

Varden_Khol

Oct 23, 2014 16:35:10

Spekke- wrote:

Bloodscythe

Oct 24, 2014 7:23:13

I'm not seeing how a cannibal is a player character. Usually players create heroes with the PHB, not monsters. The backstory is definitely rich, but the character seems to be a sociopath, having cooked humans (his own kind) and then thinking it was a good idea to cook an unborn dragon for his dragon master (thus making his master a cannibal as well) and though it works well as an NPC, I don't see this being a playable character. Although, I have to ask: A) is he done cooking people? and B) what alignment are you going with?

I'm also not sure why kobolds would allow a human to destroy a dragon, even an unborn dragon in an egg. They worship evil dragons (all evil dragons) as gods... they basically participated in the murder of a god, or in the very least the murder of a god's child.

I like the imagination though.

Spekke-

Oct 24, 2014 8:27:36

Thank you so much for the feedback!

@Varden_Khol

Epicure has two principle reasons for adventuring. One is to stay a few steps ahead of the red dragon's lackeys- there aren't that many master chefs with a scattering of red scales. The other reason is that Epicure desperately wants to find that special dish that will get Rhittanitr (his former master) to accept him back. Now that kobolds aren't bringing him fancy magical beasties to cook he's got to do it himself. Adventuring also affords him the chance to experience new cuisines and ideas that might help him in this quest.

As for connections to other party member, I agree this is a problem. My character is actually joining an ongoing campaign (at 3rd level) so I'm kind of at the mercy of the DM for where exactly I'm coming from. That's why I was trying to play a little fast and loose with the locations where everything took place. I'll talk with some of the other players (I was DMing so I already know quite a bit about their backstories) and see if they are interested in including a few tenuous connections though.

@Bloodscythe

I totally agree that Epicure has some sociopathic tendancies. I prefer to think of him more like someone who lies somewhere along the Autism spectrum though. While cooking humans is unquestionably an evil act, Epicure wasn't doing it because he wanted to taste human flesh or to fufill some dark need. Epicure did it because the only real praise he had ever heard was "good food." He already knew that the dragon was going to eat his dead compatriates, that ship had already sailed. In Epicure's twisted mind his job was just to make sure that it was "good food." This is really the core of Epicure's peculiar morailty, he feels an obligation to create quality food, especially those he cares about. He is certainly lacking the mental filters that say "these things ye shall not eat" but this is more of a facet of a slightly bent mindset than malevolence.

This is the same reason he cooked the red dragon egg. It seemed like it would be "good food." What better ingredient for an omelette than the egg of the most powerful creature on the face of the planet? Especially if your master has explicitly charged you with finding foods that will increase his magical power. If Epicure was, like you or I, a well adjusted human being he should have immediately recognized that feeding the egg to his master was a BAD idea. But that's just not how I see Epicure viewing the matter.

In response to your excellent questions:

A) Epicure hasn't been totally impressed with the culinary potential of human meat. He is unlikely to do much more with them unless requested to do so. He's also not all that proud of the humans he cooked long ago. Epicure feels embarassed with the quality of those meals and has kind of avoided cooking human since in part because of that. Epicure also understands that "good food" isn't the same for everyone and would be unlikely to cook human in the presence of others who would not enjoy such a meal. It's possible that as Epicure adventures with those of good alignements he might also acquire some of their morality (As in "Human babies aren't basically the same thing as veal? Ok, let me write that down... what about halfling babies? Hm. Are you sure?")

B) Alignment- Probably something in the neutral area leaning towards the good. I feel like the alignment system isn't particularly well suited to a character like this. I feel Epicure is basically a decent human being who is just oblivious of a few important pieces of morality. If you've read any Dragonlance imagine something similar to a kender. Epicure will generally try to do the right thing and help people who need him, he just doesn't really get the arbitrary "eating this is ok but eating this is evil" rules.

As ofr the kobolds. I feel that Epicure and the kobolds had a kind of unique relationship with the local tribe. He had a long history of making odd requests that the kobolds didn't really get, but basically every request had eventually turned out well for the tribe. By the time Epicure asked for the egg the kobolds had a kind of cheerful bewilderment that meant they would typically do what he asked and then kind of stand back to see what would happen. The egg was one example of this. They really didn't know what he had in mind (or they would have let him know what a profoundly TERRIBLE idea it was) and so they just, you know, went along for the ride. While I agree that kobolds may see all dragons as gods, the red dragon wasn't THEIR god- Rhitannitr was. They had done very well under Rhitannitr's rule (gaining more magical might and vitality as Epicure created new doshes for all to share) and could easily have been ok with doing something another tribe might have hesitated to do.

Thanks again for the feedback. I will mention both of your remarks to the DM/other players. Let me know if you think my responses would adequately address your questions/concerns or if something still doesn't quite sit right with you.

Anyhting else?

Noctaem

Oct 24, 2014 8:51:09

@Bloodscythe

I would seriously avoid dragging alignment into the discussion if I were you. No better way to derail the thread.

As for the Op:

I find your background to be well made. As a child you faced death at the hands of a massive dragon. However you managed to find a solution that allowed you to live and gain favor with said dragon. After that well, chalk it up to your character having some issues. Or maybe it was your subconscious which made you cook the egg and try to feed it to your master, the way he made you cook your own people. Who knows. Leaves things to the imagination.

Anyway good job! Lots of hooks for the DM to play with. But I do have one word of caution, don't screw over the other players at your table just because "it's your RP" or "it's what my character would do". There's a social contract involved and your characters actions are a reflection of your agreement to that contract that everyone agrees to when they sit down at the table, DM included.

(Reply to #4)

Bloodscythe

Spekke- wrote:

sleypy

Oct 24, 2014 11:20:25

I like that background. Without know anything about the campaign your joining there is really no way to judge what is reasonable, but I imagine it would be unless the setting lacking the monsters you mentioned or has a different take on them.

I don't see anything wrong, but these are my suggestions.

Your being a little too verbose in your character traits. You've got a good detailed background that contains all the important details. Because of that the traits doesn't need to to explain themselves, just act as a quick reference for you and the DM.

Something like this:

Wanted: A certain red dragon is very angry with me for stealing, and eating, his egg. His henchmen seek to find and kill me constantly to seek favor with their master.

Could be just this:

"Wanted by a vengeful dragon and his minions over a poached egg"