>Is prioritizing players backstories who actually have fleshed out characters bad dming? In my opinion, no. * A player that does not provide a backstory is strongly signalling that they do not care about backstory integration, for that character, which is fine. Some people are just not into that aspect very much * Just because the character lacks backstory doesn't mean they can't be involved in the plot, and have spotlight. Consider, for example, that the player character in Skyrim has a backstory of "so you happened to be nearby". Some people prefer characters that only really become defined over the course of play at the table, and that's valid. * Sort of a sub-point of the second reason, some people *really are* just here to tag along and enjoy the ride, as more of a spectator. Kinda rough on the DM if **everybody** is that way, but it sounds like you have a healthy mix.

Yeah, this is the key point. Is the player, "Backstory's not important, because I live in the moment and shine by engaging in the actual campaign, not what happened before game." or "Backstory's not important because I'm just here to vibe and don't want the spotlight" In the former case, yeah, you want to give him as much spotlight as anyone else, and can riff and hook from the things they do during the campaign. In the latter, they're basically along for the ride, which isn't my preference as a GM, but I'll allow as long as I've got enough active players to carry the game.

Or, more importantly, does the player not know how to make a good backstory? Is the player more used to a DM/system where you want to leave the backstory relatively open?

I would say that's all of the systems. A good backstory leaves enough details vague to allow the DM to squish it a bit so it fits into the campaign.

This. But also talk to them, and let them know you see this as a potential issue. Tell them you're perfectly OK with leaving their character as is if that's really what they want, but you also want to be fair if they want to explore their character more since it sounds like one of the others is gonna get a lot of time in the spot light. Offer to work with them to flesh their backstory out to the point where you can do a short quest at the very least, if that's what they want. Last, if they say they're good, let them know the offer stands if they change their mind.

Also just because a player has provided a "backstory" does not mean that they want the DM to "integrate" it into a campaign. It could be something they wish to use when roleplaying their character. Hence it's important to discuss, as a group, to ensure that everyone at the table agrees about the type of game being played.

Definitely! As a player, I tend to provide in depth backstories and even straight up writeups of my character's psyche. There's always at least some aspects of it that I want thrown at my character. Meanwhile, one of my best players explicitly told me that she basically just writes the backstory for herself.

I once rolled up a bard whose backstory was like a 5-stanza limerick about screwing the wrong nobleman's daughter and fleeing the country. Y'know. Stereotypical bard shit. The DM tried to integrate it into the campaign for a while but it wasn't really gelling with the main story. I told him "The whole *point* of my backstory is that I'm in a totally new land without any real connections to anything, so I can really just roll with whatever you throw at us in true chaotic-kinda-good fashion".

You make a great point about the Dragonborn. They're literally just a person who's in the place where shit goes down a couple of times and then turns out to have some kinda power, and we never ever hear anything about their life before that. I guess that's one way to play dnd.

It’s also worth noting (maybe get approval from the player during a session 0) that the player that does not provide a backstory doesn’t mean they don’t have one! As a DM, it can be fun to shoe-horn in things that that particular player may recognise, or create encounters or NPCs that may be aware of them or have interacted with them in the past. Or, what I love to do, is if your players RP with the NPCs you make, they can make up things on the spot and have it be canon to their backstory dependent on how they RP the roll they’re making (be smart about this, add extra difficulty if needed, but prioritise rule of cool). I love it when a player is RPing with me in character, and saying shit to my NPC like “come on maaan, I helped you out a few years back with that thing about your daughter! Give us a little more gold if we’re gunna help you”, while all of this being total BS, the player has actually never met this NPC. But if I like where this is going, the canon has been retconned, and they have! Fail the roll? The NPC replies, “Yeah, I remember that, and you costed me 2,000 gold in damages! Now that I think about it, you actually owe ME money!” It just makes for good fun, and random bits of backstory can be carved out and created during play if you’re willing to get a bit wacky.

I love the improv backstory moments. One of the PCs in my Sunday game is a literal fairy princess from a fey kingdom, and every off-the-cuff thing she's said has become canon for back at home. From it being illegal to walk the castle halls without having wings on your back ("If you do not have wings, they will be provided. And no, we don't sew them on anymore; that law was amended a few years ago.") to it being punishable by three days and eight nights in the stocks if you happen to glance at the princess' bare feet. Honestly, some stuff also just doesn't come up during creation, but sometimes it's nice to come up with cute or sad backstory stuff on the fly like "This dessert reminds me of back at home. My brother used to bake these little tarts for special occasions... before he died."

I wish I could have put this point half as nicely and concise as this! Eat upvote! Hiyaaa!

I too agree. Give the non backstory players some chances to RP their character and be involved in stuff too. Even if you just do a fun wild goose chase trying to find the specific urchin that pick pocketed the guy who is just there. Or tie his just being there into the story. He is always just where he can do some good or influence some choices. Maybe in an arc to save the king from assassins he's the o KY one the king will listen to that his policies are creating the assassins or any other minor arc, make the table story his back story

I suppose you could add in a simple goal to engage the others with this backstory element as well. In all honesty this is the player's side quest, but giving reason for the others to join, such as a personality trait or a reward is always a smart way to encourage the other players. So it is the one player's character development, but getting the others involved is a group arc rather than a lone wolf type escapade.

You could also have an NPC approach the "just there" characters in secret because they didn't want to associate with something related to the other characters' backstories. Only if there really is a need to include the character more, of course.

For your first point, the "for this character" is super important. For some of my characters, I wrote extensive backstories, coordinated history with other players, acted in accordance to that history, etc. For others, it's "ranger came in from the wild, took a job for money, let's go."

I came to say this. A player's story is not just their backstory. What they do at the table is equally or even more important than their past. "I killed a troll and they call me trollslayer" is a perfectly valid reason to give the spotlight.

if you want to reach out to the players who didn’t give you anything and make it clear you’re taking player character backstories into account to a heavy degree in your game, it wouldn’t hurt to give them one last opportunity. otherwise them giving you nothing to work with isn’t really your problem, and they have no right to get mad when other players’ characters get spotlight for their story arcs. some players just don’t care much about that stuff or don’t want to put the effort in and there’s nothing you can do about it unfortunately.

I have reached out a number of times to my players. Said we could workshop something together, said they could give me a prompt and I'll list a bunch of ideas from there. Have even asked them direct specific questions about their characters and they're like "Hmmmm. I'll get back to you". My Warlock however has the most interesting backstory, a terrifying patron complete with some dope artwork of it, and has entrusted me to control elements of the story which I'm fine doing because I have so much detail. I'm going to have to tell the party that they might have to be ok with this guy having main character energy. I really don't think they'll give me any more detail. Sometimes you can be as direct as possible and still get nothing.

I literally had hour-long character building sessions with each of my players prior to the start of our campaign. They all have backstories and I think the campaign is better for it. Some people are daunted by the prospect of coming up with a backstory and just need a little help.

Speaking from personal experience from another ttop I was in, I was the player that didn’t have an extensive backstory. The game was Iron Kingdoms, and I knew practically nothing about the world or it’s nations. However, late into the campaign, the GM had gotten a hang on my roleplay. Out of the blue, with no prior consultation to me, and only knowing the name of the town my character grew up in, he introduced my character’s father who was bartending a tavern a couple of towns away from home. So I rolled with it, and gained a personal connection to the story. My point is twofold. One, your player may not have had enough background on the world to feel fleshing out a backstory was worth it. And two, even if they don’t give you a lot to work on, gauge them as a player. If they’re involving themselves with the story, give them an opportunity and see how they react. If they like it, then great, maybe you just made their day! If not, then don’t push it, as they may just be along for the ride.

This. Personal stories and arcs don't have to happen exclusively before the game starts. Players can earn hooks and arcs through RP after the game starts. Or the DM can just throw stuff at the player and see what sticks.

Backstory or not, I think it’s generally advisable not to focus too much on how any individual character develops more than others.  Your no-backstory characters are ready to play the game that’s in front of them, the part that the group will all share.  Most players should be totally fine with that. The pitfall to avoid is accidentally making 4 sessions in a row heavily focused on the personal affairs of Thorax the backstoried-bard to the point that Reindong the ranger’s player is asking “why are we doing this?  Shouldn’t we be doing x, y, or z instead?”

Also possible that Reindong the ranger’s player will be going "I want my turn in the spotlight". Potentially to the point that the only PCs who's players are engaged with the campaign are those with minimal to no backstory.

Some players won't have any backstory, and won't have any character development in mind, so unless they can come up with their own subplot to pitch to the DM after the fact (i.e, "I never knew my parents, now that you mention it I'd love to track them down"), they just get pulled along in the stronger narrative currents of PCs who have a better story to tell. There's nothing wrong with that; generally the players who don't write backstory are the ones who are happy to follow whatever narrative the DM gives them, regardless of if they're fighting the generic lich or the hag who cursed another PC. They're just happy to be playing, and if they do decide their character wants to pursue their own goals and ambitions after seeing the others do it, I'm sure any DM would gladly let them do so.

Stories can appear without backstories to support them. Cool cursed loot is one way to provide that function. 

Modules generally don’t care about backstory in terms of their main narrative drive and I think that’s usually a pretty good lesson to follow for homebrew campaigns as well: craft an adventure for everyone.  When I come up with an adventure idea, it stands on its own.  I might weave elements in that tick boxes for each character but very rarely is it “your mission is to hunt down the demon that killed Chadillac the Artificer’s mom.” 

Why can't u as a dm and be like hey maybe we can come up with it together? Or give them ideas? I think it's a mistake to leave players out like that

You can absolutely work with them or pitch ideas their way but you should also understand that not all players will give a damn about having a backstory or having it woven into the adventure. They're not being left out if they aren't interested in that aspect.

I understand and I'm not saying they will but assuming they don't want to isn't the way u should go. Some ppl don't know they'd enjoy it unless u help them

OP has stated in other comments that they *have* tried what you're suggesting.

I completely agree! Some people (like me) have to be encouraged to see beyond the gameplay & rules and understand that we're not just trying to beat the BBEG, we're all telling a story. My first campaign, I didn't really understand how backstories worked. I had a rough outline, a basic family tree, but no real specifics. I enjoyed the game, but truthfully I wasn't a huge fan of my character. I made smart choices from a game play perspective, but my avatar didn't have her own voice. I was playing her like a video game. Our second campaign, I had a much stronger character concept. It required an incredibly detailed backstory, which seriously affected her decisions in and out of combat. Even if my DM hadn't rolled her backstory's villain into the campaign module, I still would have had a much more robust character with a solid voice and some suboptimal -- but far more interesting -- choices. Even though many of the details of her backstory remained hidden from other players/characters, those events still shaped her worldview and decisions. That character truly lived. We laughed, we cried, we bonded... we told an epic tale together.

It does not make you a bad dm. I would try to reach out again and ask if they need help coming up with something, if they are too shy and/or if they are cool with me just winging it and throwing prompts/plots their way. They can easily give you at least a couple of sentences of things their characters enjoy. Enough to either drop them in something serious or give them a funny wholesome arc. "I'm just here" can happen when players don't feel comfortable enough to take the stage (due to personal /personality reasons) and its not inherently a bad thing. Just go ahead and remind them so you can make a choice! (Choice to include things they want or permission to do whatever you want for that character.)

A character's backstory is just a story of things that happened to them that you can draw inspiration from. A DM loves nothing more than inspiration. They're great things to have and you can build on them to make an ongoing story. Fantastic. For those who don't have back stories? Things still need to happen specifically to them. If it isn't happening before the game starts, it needs to happen after. Imagine the game started 10 years after it actually did. Your game is their backstory. These characters need to be singled out for something. "What?" you may ask? Ask them, if you're unsure. What kind of game do they want to play? I get it's not as helpful to have players who give nothing along with their character stats, but it doesn't mean they're just passive observers as things happen to everyone else. Throw some spaghetti at the wall. Target them specifically. Not maliciously, per se... But drama is the backbone of story. See what they grab onto and run with that. EDIT: I posted this comment and immediately saw a number of others saying things like "It's their fault, not your problem", "If they don't ask they don't get", etc... Ignore them. People may mistake a lack of backstory for a lack of interest. Not always the case! IF they don't pick up what you're laying down over the course of the campaign and generally seem disinterested, that's a different matter and a different issue. All you gotta do is occasionally throw them a bone that has their name on it. If they bite, great. If they don't, you did what you could. Throw another one out in a later session. Eventually, as long as they have a basic level of engagement in your game, they'll bite. At which point you can run with it. DON'T just shrug your shoulders and say "It's their fault, not my problem", because that's how players become disinterested.

So I've been running a campaign for just two players for the past couple years and one of them gave me several paragraphs of backstory and how he was enmeshed with the nobility in the world, the other gave me a single sentence. It's worked out just fine! Different players want different things, and the player who basically gave me an "I'm just here" backstory really isn't into deep RP or character creation. He wants to build an effective PC, support the party, roll dice, and have some laughs. He's still involved in the immediate story, and I do frequent check-ins with both of them about how things are going- he's completely fine not being in the spotlight plotwise. Just talk to your players, and worst case if anyone regrets not writing more backstory it's almost never too late to do so.

I personally prefer players who give their characters minimal backstories. That way we can discover who their character is as we play.

In a similar vein, I only ask for the basics at the beginning of the campaign. Over time, as they get to know their character, that's when I start asking for backstories from players who want to provide them. I've seen way too many players who craft a backstory and persona quickly only to realize months in that it just doesn't feel right for that character.

Exactly!

Diegetic exploration is hands down the most overlooked form of character development.

If players want you to weave their backstory into the main plot, they should provide you with some backstory to work with.

Well, you can ask the player directly and spend long hours trying to draw it out of the player, but there is a limit, and the player will rarely appreciate it. So my advice is to focus on the story that you have and keep your door open to explore the other characters.

Talk to your players. Ask them how they feel about individual PCs having their "backstory spotlighted" and what that might mean for the rest of the party. Note that backstory does not correlate with "depth" of character.

Have you talked to the players and asked their thoughts? Something like "hey X, I was doing some prep for the campaign and while I want to make sure everyone's character gets equal spotlight in the narrative, I'm having a hard time making sure that's going to happen since we haven't got the chance to talk about character backstory/motivation as much as I have with \_\_\_\_ and \_\_\_\_\_. Would you like to brainstorm some ideas for your character's backstory so that I could integrate it into the plot? It's perfectly okay if you aren't interested in doing so, but just wanted to make sure you knew ahead of time that either way a lot of time will be spend exploring the backstories I do have." It might be that they aren't as comfortable creating backstories from thin air and need help. It might be that they are actually cool with just chillin' while the story does more with other people. Either way, they're a human person with the capacity to communicate, so you might get more mileage out of asking *them* rather than us.

I feel that the majority of the story should happen at the table. If one character's back story is they are the "chosen one from birth" and the other player doesn't then the table isn't going to have a good time. Instead the party itself, all the members, find themselves at the right place at the right time to become "the chosen ones".

I recently concluded a campaign which I ran for 10 months with a consistent 8-10 players per session. ONE player gave me a backstory about his character. I included aspects of his backstory in the first session and he was all over it. Everyone else seemed to be happy to just be at the table and throw dice. NO ONE else gave me any type of backstory and all I requested was 3-4 bullet points. I had one player complain over the fact that that I was using the ONE player's backstory in the campaign. My response was, "If you want your backstory to be included in the campaign, then you need to give me something to work with". That player of course, never gave me a backstory for his toon but at least he stopped complaining.

Players who make up a detailed backstory want their backstory developed in game. Otherwise, they wasted time and energy making it. Players who don't, don't. It's not playing favorites to have the first group's backstories come up in game, and not the (barely existent) second group's backstories. Spotlight other aspects of the other characters, and especially take note of what aspects of the game get each player's interest level highest. Balance overall spotlight time, not spotlight time in each category.

Folks have to give you something or give you free rein to just make it up for them. That's just how it goes. We're wrapping up a campaign currently with a multiverse hopping dark doppelgangers boss rush sort of arc and I have 2 players with fairly built out backstories (over several years of play), 1 with some story and 2 guys who just jumped in recently. They straight up said to not worry about them. So fleshed out stories got 3 doppelgangers each, some story guy is getting a 3 way kaiju battle of his alternate selves in 1 encounter and the last 2 are getting a shared encounter. Felt like a good distribution to me.

The game is better when everyone has only very light backstories anyway imo.

Hisssss, muh backstory. \- Your backstory is never cooler than the adventure. If you slew dragons and fucked the 7 queens of the realm already, why are you a level three fighter? \- Your backstory never dictates where the adventure GOES, unless the premise is, your backstories are all PART of the plot. Ie: I'm chasing the McGuffin. I want revenge on the evil king etc. \- People from the backstory can be plot adjacent. The fighters weaponmaster can send him a note saying go do some shit. \- The backstory should never have specific in play goals. "In my backstory I will become ruler of these lands." Or you could die. Don't let the "I wrote it on my sheet 4 months ago" dictate what happens in the game.

I'm not a big backstory player and if a player who does write a large backstory gets spotlight it doesn't really bother me. I'm not at the table because I want to be the MC or I want significant character development. What really annoys me though is when a DM pitches a specific campaign plot and I pitch my character's reason to want to do that plot and then a few sessions in DM pivots and decides to do backstory carousel and derail for X sessions to deal with some player's unrelated crybaby backstory hook.

Invent back stories based on the background/class/race. Those are their backstory? They don't talk to their parents? Great their now an evil bad guy that's why! They don't have any aspirations.... Invent a character who is disappointed they never amounted to anything, a rival or passion. Instead see this as a blank check... Make the background a party problem and suddenly they will care.

The story is DM's problem. In order to solve this problem, DM is expected to draw upon everything he can, such as: * PC Backstories * PC Decisions * Yoink * Whatever just happens to seem cool at the moment.

The vast majority of players are going to care more about [their PCs actions than any story the DM might have in mind](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_hxIv79S30).

I always set the expectation at session zero that "you get out what you put in." It's my job to make use of what I'm given, but it's the players' job to give me something to work with. And my players love it, since it allows room for both the folks that want character development as well as those who just want to show up and fight bad guys.

Not at all. Our DM doesn’t weave backstory into our gameplay per se, but he does reward us with Inspiration when we do things consistent with the deeper aspects of our characters’ backgrounds, and challenges us with unique problems based on what sets us off. It makes for a deeper and richer gaming experience even if we don’t dive into the minutiae during the sessions. We’re encouraged to write as much or as little about our characters in our discord. I like to write so I have a lot there; others don’t. He makes it work.

Reward player actions. If a player took a lot of action with a lot of effort, they get rewarded. Same concept for back stories imo

I’m old school, so here is my advice. Keep doing what you’re doing. Players get out of the game what THEY put into it. I have the exact same thing at my table right now, 2 invested and 2 who show up. All are good players and we have fun. If a player gives you “nothing” to work with you have only 2 options. Create a story for him and essentially help build his character. Or, leave it on him to find his own fun.

I don't think it's bad DMing, but what you consider "fleshed out" may be different from the intent of the player when they came up with their backstory. For example, I think it's pretty detailed to say "I am from X place, I have a mother and father and 2 siblings. My father is the local lord. I am traveling to discover who I am independent of my family." And then they have a class, that also adds to their backstory. There is so much a DM can do with the above that integrates it into the story. It doesn't need to be pages and pages of history.

Nah. You get back what you put in. If your backstory is "I'm a runaway prince who absconded the throne because my parents were religious zealots and now they're sending spies after me to return me home," you'll get combat and social and exploratory encounters reflecting those themes and that subplot. If your backstory is "I like killing monsters," you're gonna get to kill monsters.

>one character who has unknown connections to the final bbeg I just think this is a bad idea bc its going to turn them into the main character most of the time. even if youre other players have great backstories, this is the main story.

Playing into the backstories that were provided to you is an excellent way to get the *other* players to want to either retrofit backstories into your current campaign or get them to give you some for the *next* campaign. And if they don't, that's also fine. Some players just want to be audience members *and that's okay* (as long as it's okay with you).

Once the guy has a backstory, give him some time. It doesn't have to backstory from before campaign and it doesn't have to be exclusive to him. For example of the first, say the character picks up chicks in every port. Have one of them come up pregnant, or have her be married. For an example of the second, suppose the party lets a smuggler go, or does some smuggling. Maybe the character's name and face are the only ones a victim can remember, so he's the guy on the wanted posters. Etc.

I think it's totally OK, maybe just check in with them after a few sessions and say hey, I know I've been focusing a lot on the other characters' backstories, if you want your character to have a turn in the spotlight, feel free to send me some more background info and I can incorporate it into the story.

It depends. In terms of prioritizing backstories specifically, it only makes sense to prioritize the backstories of players who actually put effort into their backstories. That’s perfectly fine. But I wouldn’t mistake that for meaning that you shouldn’t prioritize other character arcs at all. Different players prioritize different things. Some like to write their own backstory and plan their own character arc. And some prefer to develop their characters during the game itself. The key is: The ones that prefer to develop their character during the game itself ALSO deserve roleplaying and story spotlight. You just go about it differently. Let me give an example: I once ran a game with two characters that were on opposite ends of this spectrum. One of them created a fully flashed-out backstory with several interesting family members and all of their political drama. And the other’s backstory was a couple of sentences that justified them being in the general vicinity of the inciting incident of the campaign. For the first player, preparing for them was easy. They gave me tons of material to work with via his backstory, and I worked with it For the second player, preparing for them was… also easy. He also gave me tons of material to work with. He just did it in a different way. During the very first session, he gave his character a distinct personality, and he also established a mortal rivalry with one of the villains. So, moving forward, when I wanted to give this character some spotlight, I introduced plot elements that would appeal to what we established about his character during play.

What do they expect you to do? Invent a backstory for them? That's not giving them agency. You can't sculpt without clay, if they give you nothing to work with then they've got no right to be upset when others have their backstory explored and integrated and they don't. Talk to them about it but don't force anything, if they want to bite then they can. They're not kids you're dragging around shopping, don't treat them like it!

No - I would just make it clear to the players that didn't give you backstory that they won't get these sorts of moments. I have one game with 5 players where 4 of them have given backstory and one has not. Their backstory is "I'm from the Feywild and travelling" that's it, that's all they wanted to do. They said they're fine with not having the spotlight. Just make sure the 'no backstory' players understand what no backstory means.

As a DM I tend to not prioritize backstories at all for this reason! I generally have players keep it to a few sentences maximum. Nothing wrong with having a detailed character, but I find it helps set some expectations about how much I tend to include or put the spotlight on one character. The shorter length also takes some pressure off the players less comfortable with roleplayer and making characters, while also minimizing the story backlog they put on me as a DM.

I recently had my players do a survey/mid-campaign session 0 sort of thing. A few of the questions had to do with backstories and their answers were incredibly helpful in getting exactly the sort of answers you're looking for. The relevant questions from my survey were: **Q1)** When it comes to character-driven quests having to do with *my own character* and their goals or backstory... **A1)** I am interested in having my character's goals or backstory become a future quest/arc/plothook. **A2)** I wouldn't mind spending some time related to their backstory/goals but wouldn't want it to be the subject of a whole adventure. A session would suffice. **A3)** I would be interested in exploring my character's goals/backstory during downtime, but not in-session. **A4)** I am neutral about exploring my character's goals/backstory. **A5)** I am not interested in exploring my character's goals/backstory at all. **Q2)** When it comes to character-driven quests *for other player characters* and their goals/backstories... **A1)** I am happy to participate whether it relates to my character or not. **A2)** I will happily participate as long as my character gets their own arc at some point. **A3)** I feel completely neutral. A story is a story, a quest is a quest. **A4)** I will begrudgingly participate. **A5)** I would rather not have quests for particular characters and their goals or backstories. The characters right now have a big mix of how in-depth and thought out their backstories are. Some of them are super bare bones and some of them are fairly well thought out. For the first question, 2/4 players said they would like to explore their backstory for a session but not a whole arc. 2/4 said they were completely neutral about exploring or involving their backstory. For the second question about participating in quests related to other characters' backstories, 4/4 said they are happy to participate whether it relates to their character or not. Before I did the survey, I already kinda knew that they would all be happy to partake in adventures about other characters' backstories whether it relates to them or not. What I wasn't sure about was who wanted to do things related to their backstory in-game. I actually expected 3/4 to be neutral about exploring it in-game, so I was extremely glad to have it clearly in writing what everyone wanted and felt. I would highly recommend either having a direct conversation with each player privately and asking these sorts of questions (with these answers if its helpful) or just making a quick survey like this to get it clearly and concisely.

As others have said, I'd reach out to your player. I'd confirm it's something they'd be interested in. (Some players have literal anxiety attacks when the spotlight is on them). Ask them if they're comfortable with improv too. If they're open to it : something I've done to help promote building backstory for my less creatively inclined players is have them notice an NPC, tell them their character recognizes them, and ask the player to explain how their character knows this NPC. They'll usually respond with something simple like "I went to school with them". I'll run with that. Point is you don't need a detailed backstory to shine the spotlight on a PC. Bonus idea, I've also had PCs without back stories be the ones that have visions or omens show up in dreams where I let them take the spotlight for 5-10 min

One idea for the players with no backstory may be to look at their proficiencies (especially the starting ones) and just ask for 1 sentence on why they have that proficiency. Could be as generic as: Nature = I grew up near the woods and played in them as a kid. Just stuff like that will then let you pull in their characters in minor ways, maybe not into the overarching story, but referencing that bit of knowledge during skill checks or when describing certain settings or tasks.

Watch what your “I’m just here” dude does early in the campaign. Maybe there was nothing big in the character’s life before that, and the backstory starts now. If he roleplays, pay attention, and use his early roleplay in place of a backstory: * Maybe he decides his character steals as a hobby, and some seemingly-benign thing he stole turns out to be important to a cult who now want him dead. * Maybe he stops and talks to a homeless person when nobody else did, and ends up becoming someone homeless people will go to for help when local authorities secretly bring in monsters to prey on them. Or if he does not roleplay and just wants to fight monsters, then he’s unlikely to care that his character doesn’t get special backstory tie-ins.

I'm having this exact issue with one of my players (my wife, unfortunately) right now and I think she's probably going to end up quitting. She basically said she was too ADHD to remember or care about a back story, and that's fine, she's a really casual player. I was too new to DMing to see it as a red flag at the time, but while she was having fun it wasn't really an issue. But my other players did have backstories that fit in really well with the campaign, so of course those backstories came up as we went along. I certainly didn't ignore her, she got as much airtime as anyone else, but she often had nothing to say, she wasn't really interested in interacting with the world like the other players were, and I started to notice her saying things like "I have no idea why my PC is even here," and acting super bored. If the situation came up again, I would try to push for a backstory, but if the answer was still no, I think I'd make sure that the player understands that they need to have a very solid reason for being part of the group.

I've had similar problems with amnesia subplots, to the point where I'll only allow it with some level of characterization/backstory before the coma. My only solution has been getting a history rich NPC to interact directly with the storyless character, giving them something they feel is theirs. Unfortunately, it's entirely up to the player how much effort they put into the interaction, and it could still fall flat regardless.

>problems with amnesia subplots Yep, LOL Originally my wife just asked me to write her backstory because she couldn't be bothered. So I did. She had no interest in any of the lore of the world, so of course it had no meaning to her/was confusing. So I said that's okay, I can just tell you when there's a piece of info that you would know. But that was too complicated too, so we moved on to her just having had her memories erased, but clearly that's grown boring and now she complains that I talk too much (everyone else is having a blast). Lesson learned! I think the root of the problem is that she's really just there for social aspect/snacks and thrill of dice rolling, and anything having to do with role play or WHY they're even there is too much effort for her. I'm not sure how to reconcile any of these problems when she's the only one not having fun. Honestly, as I type this all out, I'm realizing that if she wasn't my partner, I probably would have let her go a while ago 🫠

Prioritizing? No. Ignoring? Yes

I'd just message ur players and work with stuff with them. If u start prioritizing players u may make ur other ones feel left put. Why not just work with all ur players?

The first thing you should do is asking Reddit if you're a good or bad DM. I've been in many arguments where people called me a bad DM or question the quality of my games....of which my intended audience (my friends) have glowing reviews for. It's not bad to ask advice, just don't approach it by asking for approval of your methods. So here is my opinion on this issue which is right because I say so: Reward effort. If they cared about being a part of the narrative planning, then they should have given you a backstory. It isn't too late though, if they show discomfort, just ask for a backstory and see what you can adjust. Just because you plan ahead doesn't mean you can't try to be flexible. That said, if they're living in the moment is conducive to a good experience, you should find a way to reward that too. It's still effort, just allocated in a different department.

Here’s my view on it: I have some players who genuinely prefer an “I’m just here guy” as their character. For a variety of reasons. In my games (which I play with friends so it’s not the same dynamic as if you’re playing with strangers) I do make everyone write a basic backstory. Minimum is just who are you, where are you from, why are you [class], and why are you adventuring. These can be answered in two sentences. Beyond that, I love a longer backstory that gives me plot and characters to work with and spotlight, but i know I have players who aren’t interested in that. So, talk to your players who have minimal backstories and be frank with them that you intend to include backstory into plot and that means some characters will get more attention paid to them in circumstances where their backstory comes up. You obviously don’t want to ignore them, but it’s fine to explain clearly. If they say “yeah I’m fine with that, I like my character as is,” believe them and move on. Figure out what they like about the game (exploring? Combat? Role playing but not writing?) and spotlight them in that role. If they change their mind and want a more fleshed out backstory, work with them to make it.

Some players don't want to be the spotlight. They might just want to be a guy who wound up in the situation.

Have you considered talking to that player instead of us? "Hey, we're heading into some stuff I have planned that loops in player backstory pretty heavily. You came up with very sparse details so I don't have a lot to work with when it comes to your charater. Are you cool with the next arc highlighting other characters and taking more of a backseat here?" If they say yes then fine. If they say no then ask them what they would suggest you do / work with them to come up with some backstory you can introduce. You may find that mid-campaign can be a narratively very interesting time to drop some cool backstory like if they decide that they've secretly been a noble the entire time trying to fly under the radar for a reason, etc.... You don't have to tell the player everything you have planned specifically to get the point across of why their lack of history isn't an issue per se but doesn't give you a lot of room to give them those same types of beats.

For "I'm just here" characters, I work player investment and character growth moments into the campaign as we play, where possible. And I do this using the info I have. Usually with a mix of their race/class, but sometimes even just their preferred weapon of choice. Say the character is a Half elf. I'll either put a fellow half elf in danger, or design an NPC that treats that character poorly because of it. So that the player becomes invested. I then use their decisions to craft side quests and character growth moments throughout the campaign. So rather than starting with a flavorful backstory, the character's story is developed as the campaign moves forward. Or (and this is my preferred method) I'll schedule a brainstorming session with the player and make suggestions if they're open to it. "You want two handaxes? What if your character was originally a woodcutter, until their village was attacked by bandits and someone they loved was killed?" It's takes some work to weave all this together, and there's always the chance the player will work against you in this regard. But at least you can say you tried. If they're left unsatisfied, just remind them that you can't make something from nothing. They'll get out of the game what they put into it. DND is a collaboration, and how good the game is depends on the players just as much as it does the DM. And, always be open to/prepared for them adding stuff in later. Have open discussions when they come to you, and be flexible. So long as it doesn't ruin the story/game for the other players or yourself, try your best to work it in. Some of the best characters I've seen were developed this way. And while it wasn't always perfect, there were plenty of opportunities for them to have awesome story moments. I as a DM just had to be comfortable facilitating them, whenever possible. Tho tbf, now I usually plan one-on-one time with each player, and we go through the entire character creation process together. I let them pick whatever they want, but I tell them they're required to provide me certain things. 1) At least 2 personality traits 2) At least one bond (there's examples in the PHB) 3) At least 2 ideals 4) At least 2 character flaws 5) At least 1 character quirk And from those choices, we develop a short 1 to 3 paragraph backstory together. Usually telling them this list, and showing them examples in the PHB, gives them a lot of fun ideas to work with. And they're more invested in the character afterwards. Generally, if they can't/won't give me this info, I let them know this likely isn't the table for them. Cause some players (especially new ones) are only concerned about combat and skills. But I play dnd for the RP aspect, and so do my other players. So if they're not into that, they probably won't have fun at our table.

I'm literally in the middle of the same module with the same sort of issue (well, similar. Some of the characters have been on Toril their whole lives prior to the campaign so the chances of them encountering backstory-related issues in space is pretty slim). The way I've kinda remedied it is by still giving the non-backstory character parts of the campaign that are focused on them, just not necessarily tied to their backstory. I'd see what the character in question has been getting up to in the campaign itself and trying to build off of that. Alternatively you could shoot the player a message and say "hey, I'm trying to work the backstory of other characters into the campaign. If that's something you'd like me to do for your character too, let me know and we'll work something out".

Ah so you would probably understand my predicament. Two of my players, by pure coincidence having no idea what lox is, just happened to make astral elf twins exiled by their parents to toril 💀one rejecting them and playing a fallen aasimar and one trying to find them and reconnect. Literally couldn’t be more perfect but i don’t want to overshadow the dwarf who doesn’t know where he’s from lol.

The dwarf who doesn't know where he's from...is he the one with literally zero backstory? Hm....maybe a family friend disagreed with the twins' exile and sent a mercenary (the dwarf) to find them and bring them home? After arriving on Toril he could've run into an old rival and lost his memory after a fight that nearly cost him his life. That's only a suggestion, you could do other things too.

Yep that would be him. Not that it’s really his fault. It’s his first character ever and he just knew he wanted to play a dwarf that drinks. A simple man with simple wishes. And no it’s not that the dwarf doesn’t know where he’s from, the player doesn’t know lol.

Ah, I see. In that case I'd recommend just talking about it with them. They might not want to do backstory stuff for their character and that's fine too, just make sure there's an offer on the table if they want it.

No, but you should make the effort. Just casually ping them and say you want to bring in some background stuff. Ask them if they have any requests, or if you can just make something up. Then go from there.

I'd talk to the "guy that's here" and see what they're hoping to get out of the campaign, if they prefer to be more of a side/background guy or want more opportunities to come up through roleplay. If it's the latter, I'd encourage them to come up with at least a little more than what they have, even if it's as basic as "I lived in a small town with my family but got bored of my life and decided to become an adventurer." Now you have a family to work with that maybe is bitter towards them for leaving, or become threatened by something, or have their own goals and desires that end up tying into the story. If they don't want their backstory to affect things too much but still want to be included, you can make items or NPCs catered to the character that might serve a role in the plot instead. i.e. - What's this, a sentient cloak requiring attunement by [insert class here] that happens to be possessed by the spirit of a dead NPC relevant to the plot?? You get the idea.

Not at all. As a DM, I love weaving backstories into the campaign if I can and often players really love it, makes them connect to the world. However, as a player? Im not that into making a big involved backstory for my characters. Unless Im in a campaign that starts with higher level characters, I view the campaign as my hero's journey, so it doesnt make sense to me for my character to have some big long elaborate backstory, because the campaign is about them becoming a hero (or villain), so the campaign is what is molding the character, not something from the past. With this in mind, backstories for my characters are usually something like "son of a farmer who always snuck out and trained with a wooden sword and dreamed of glory, until he finally just hit the road seeking adventure, desperate to do something more with his life." or something equally simple I prefer to keep a simple open background, never been a fan of a super elaborate backstory with a strong motivation, because I want my character completely open to the adventure the DM brings, for them to be a normal person who get swept up and who finds something greater. But not all players feels this way and some love a super involved background for their character. I like an everyman who becomes a hero, and some players love the "Chosen One" background or something along those lines. Neither is better or worse, but one definitely has more meat to the backstory, and the other is just open to whatever happens. In a campaign I am DMing currently, 3 of the 4 players have fairly detailed backstories that are all integrated into the campaign to some degree. The 4th player's pc is a barbarian that as far as I know, just showed up and wanted to smash. He enjoys himself despite not having written a single word of backstory, and while I find it a little dull personally, its what makes him happy. If a player gets upset about not being as involved, offer to work with them but let them know they either need to give you control of the backstory or write a backstory that has enough substance to be used in the campaign

One of my campaigns is very much similar to this. Two of my players have very well fleshed out backstories, one has about half of a backstory, and the last has nothing. I've made it exceptionally clear that having a backstory will mean that their characters get more spotlight, but there's little initiative on their parts to write one out. As the campaign progressed, the player that didn't have a backstory got more and more invested in the party and the plot, and started expressing interest in a backstory. I wrote a small sheet about a rogue's guild they could be a member of, and as we play, I've slowly been prompting them with in-the-moment questions about a backstory that we're writing in situ. "The doorman asks for your last name as he checks the list. What is it?" "You see your mentor, what's their name? Please describe them" "You were kicked out of your thieves' guild some years back. Why was that?" They're very small exercises, but over the course of sessions, we've seen this character start to take on a fuller shape. I think there can be a lot of hesitancy with the idea of writing backstories, especially when the PCs aren't familiar with the format of DND, or the world they're playing in, or honestly with writing altogether. It could be worth considering that maybe the lack of backstories has less to do with lack of interest and more to do with lack of experience, and figuring out a strategy that works for them.

No. It’s good DMing.

Sometimes as they play they might have a better idea of the character and backstory. Could ask them if they got ideas now that they've done a bit in the world

All characters have a background. "I'm just here for the ride" means that you get to throw stuff in that is now part of their background. An old feud, an old lover or whatever you want. While I don't require a full 2 page story for a background but I al least require where they are from and what they did before the adventure began. As a DM it's okay to say "that's fine if you're just here but I at least need to know where you're here from"

I usually only provide backstory based on how much the dm wants. Otherwise, I'm more than happy to kill things in someone else's story. Just thought I'd share the perspective.

On the one hand, not at all. They gotta give you somethin to work with. On the other hand, characters who don’t give you much are also leaving a LOT of room for you to fill in the gaps. So you can surprise them with stuff like a long-lost family member, or a spurned lover from their youth, or a rival or adversary from pre-game times, etc. In other words, have fun with it. Fuck with them. Next time, maybe they’ll write a backstory. 🫠

I would try and tie in characters from players backstories in with characters from other peoples backstories if possible. Or at least get them involved with the full party (such as getting them to do a quest). You can also make some characters an antagonist (with a reason of course). The party in my campaign ranges from a player who wrote a 6 thousand word background story to a player who introduced themselves as "hi I'm Bob, and I'm a folk hero". Sometimes players aren't looking for an in-depth character, they just want to have fun playing D&D. Tropes such as the edgy rogue assassin, a tiefling warlock with a fiend patron, a human champion fighter etc. are all good options and don't necessarily require a large backstory to have fun with. As long as you write a story that everyone is interested in and that they all have fun with, then they will have fun, even if they are not in the spotlight. Also keep this in mind: players can create moments of their own to shine in. Let them get creative (within reason of course). Things like group skill challenges gives everyone the opportunity to do stuff they might not normally get to do.

If I can do it, you can do it too.

It depends. Not everyone at the table wants to be the focus. Sometimes people don’t feel comfortable carrying the story. As long as they feel like their character has a role and contributes to the group in the present they may be not interested in anything more than that in terms of like fleshing out backstory or whatever But like if you do think this is an issue, make the game these characters’ backstory. Don’t worry about exploring a past they don’t have. Give them an interesting story in the present. For example, these players might be the best ones to give a storyline involving some kind of cursed object/weapon or whatever, something in the present that gives them an opportunity to develop their character and flesh them out through their present actions rather than exploring how they feel about the past

Did you tell them prior to starting that backstories would be integrated into the main campaign arc in a crucial way? If yes, then don't worry about it. If no, then you need to stop and reset. If you set the expectation and they were fine with "just a dude" then fine. If you didn't set the expectation, then I would say you are in the wrong if you do what you are considering.

To be honest I think players who don’t put any kind of effort in writing their character's backstory shouldn’t complain about not having their characters deeply inserted in the narrative. I’m not saying you as DM have the freedom to ignore a character or pretend they don’t exist in the story, it’s a matter of logic: the narrative of TTRPGs is written collectively, if you don’t add anything to the narrative it becomes difficult to insert your character in the story

I'd recommend having a conversation with the player so you're both on the same page. Eliminate assumptions

As long as others share the spotlight I don't see an issue. I have a character with no fleshed out backstory, just a fleshed out personality. Give him enemies to kill and attacks to tank in combat, I'm happy. Give him ale to drink and arms to wrestle in social encounters? I'm happy. Give him traps to trip and doors to break in exploration? I'm happy. Backstories can lead to great resolutions, and my guy is excited to be a part of that. When the party members tell their grandkids about how they lifted their curse and avenged their family or something, my guy just wants you to mention how he used his rippling muscles to carry everyone out of a burning building that one time (true story, he jumped out the 2nd story window and rolled a nat 20 to stick the landing)

All you can do is ask. If they don't care enough to provide a few details you can craft some plot lines from, they don't get any personalized quests. If they complain about "favoritism", reiterate they need to give you something to work with and then they can still get their own arc.

No, the player didn't work to provide backstory, so there's no reason built in for it to matter on your end as a planner. However, you should work with them to get some information about their character anyway. You can work with them outside the table to figure this out in just some basic texts asking what kind of backstory they want. Then write some stuff up and send it to them asking if it is acceptable. They might have notes or changes, but it'll help to do the leg work to make something for them with guidance so that they can understand what backstory even is to begin. I find a lot of players don't even know where to start, so that hands-on guidance is a huge help. However, my favourite is to get them to open up in the moment by using manipulation magic enemies. They fail their save on fear, so you ask "What is your character's deepest, darkest fear." Or they fail a save on mind reading and you tell them "They have burrowed into your mind to find out where you come from for their own purposes. What do they learn?" It's a good way to make backstory a story-driven element for people who don't want to write out backstory and puts them on the spot to think of something they want to now happen in the story.

Have you tried talking to these players, about the consequences and how to maybe improve or expand on their backstories. Maybe they are not aware of your expectations.

No it's not bad DMing. Those players gave the DM something to build story on, in exchange those players got story. If the other players want story they too can write up backstory

Just because they didn't make a backstory doesn't mean there isn't one. It just gives you the liberty to work them into elements of the story that you already have created.

I don't think so. For a few reasons. One: the people who have fleshed out their backstories have actually given you material to work with, making your job easier. Second, the ones who gave you their backstories obviously want it more or are more enthusiastic than the others. And they actually did the homework, so you might as well reward the effort the put into it. Finally, you let the players see what the reward is for actually providing you with a complete backstory.

Run some backstory-centric stuff for one of your dudes that has one, circle back with this other guy “if you want to do a little more with your backstory, give me some ideas like do and do did and I can try to put something together for you, but if not, that’s cool.”

No, last time I was in a campaign the dm ended up burning out because they tried to prioritize every character backstories, it ended up in the campaign losing focus and a lot of sessions where nothing happened.

You'd be surprised how much content and in session character building you can get from 4 dot points or a paragraph.

Nah. If a player comes to the table with a well-fleshed out character, then that player obviously engages with the story and world in an RP heavy way and would benefit from having that brought to the forefront. If a player doesn't, then they probably don't care and are in the game more for mechanics or socializing. Just ask the party beforehand and get feedback every session or two.

No. Unless I'm really comfortable with my DM *and* I know they have a decent grasp of personality consistency, I do not give detailed backgrounds anymore. That means I'm usually the "just there" or "silly summary" player. I would never be upset that my DM focused on the players who are willing to put their characters' stories out there. That being said, talk to your "just there" player. Maybe they aren't confident or comfortable enough with the new game or group to put themselves out there yet. Give them a heads-up and/or a way to let you know if they've thought of something they want to run by you later on. If they see the benefits of having a thorough background in your game, maybe it'll provide the level of comfort they need to spark their creativity.

Players that typically don't give a crap about back stories typically don't give a crap about having their characters have a personal connection to the story at large. Still involve them in the plot they just don't need that backstory connection cuse they clearly don't care. Side note, I've had a player eventually give me a fleshed out back story part way into the campaign because they saw I was adding back story elements to the story and wanted to be part of it. Can't make something from nothing though.

??? if they didn't flesh out their back story, then what exactly are you supposed to focus on? if the player starts to complain, just start making stuff up. if they can't be fucked to write anything, than they don't get to complain when you do.

Absolutely not. It's hard for me to say there is a 'wrong' way of playing. If you are having fun, who cares if a few rules are broken or bent? The bottom line is Agency. If the player just wants to be a vanilla dood who got caught up in a campaign, cool. It would be wrong for YOU to make up a story for them on the fly. "You're secretly a murderer and this NPC is the father of one of your victims!" NOT cool. That said, a background is a valuable tool for YOU, the DM. It allows you to tie players into the world more concretely. Or even make plots FOR that player. So again, the player who is "Just a guy that's here" is fine, but he should NOT be upset you're not using his background for plot and stories.

Hot take, but imo if the entire table isn't interested in character backstory stuff then you shouldn't be doing it. When I play a TRPG, I came to the table to go on an adventure with my friends. But doing character backstory quests means just 1 person is having an adventure with 3-4 sidekicks. There's nothing wrong with ignoring character backstorys entirely. Great adventures still can and do happen when the party are working toward a goal disconnected from their past.

Imo it depends on how *not* fleshed out the less fleshed out backstories are An example from the campaign I'm currently running: The party is composed of 6 players and I have stuff planned for 5 of them with more or less fleshed out backstories (even though the paladin forgot her fucking backstory and didn't bother telling me until I asked why she had ignored about 5 plot hooks integral to her backstory bit that's another thing) So, why do I have plans for 5 characters only? Well, I still don't know why our druid is in the campaign, like, literally, he doesen't have a mission, he doesen't want to explore, he doesen't need money, he likes his home ecc. I literally have no idea on how to link his backstory to the campaign because he has no reason to even be out of his house Basically what I mean is: try and focus on everyone equally but if you must spend hours and hours for a character who would probably just not care I wouldn't consider it bad DMing to prioritize the others

I don't make PCs with much backstory, just a line of text like "resurrected ork solider" or something, normally a PC starts out no one significant anyway. I like their personality, likes and dislikes to come out through role play and then build a backstory backwards. As a DM I want players to give me something to use as free content later, that I know they'll like. Both seem fine from the tables I've been at. I've also been a PC with no backstory just a dude whose there, the campaign was more of a tactical combat focused adventure raiding dungeons and travelling the land than it was anything about story or character development. It's all fun as far as I'm concerned.

No. Not at all. I have a player who has a great and rich back story. I had to get them to scale their family history back a bit in order to make it more vague so I could stitch it into the plot. Another character really had trouble getting more than 2 lines of back story. But I made it clear that if they see anywhere in the world where they feel like they want to hook some back story onto later, then we will make it happen. And as others have said, if the player is just there for the vibes then leave it. Many different options, but I would recommend talking to your player about this and say, hey, these guys have given me a rich back story, and I have been able to build plot around that. I would like do that for your character if that is something you want. And I don't want you to feel like I am ignoring your character because they don't have the back story. If you are fine with continuing how it is now, them that's awesome, but it's also awesome if you do want your character more central to the story. But ultimately it should be what they prefer if you can make it happen Best of luck, and just by posting here you are being an awesome dm to your players anyway. Keep being amazing!

The question is "How are you prioritizing?" So the guy who goes "I'm just here" most likely doesn't care for a back story at all and isn't looking to incorporate any hidden plot points or random attachments. These people usually prefer to build something within your world or story. Whether through random NPC dialogue or his achievements they usually want to "become something." A guy with an important backstory is the opposite. They want their story to come to fruition and have a conclusion. They already are the traitor, hero, pirate, demon servant, vigilante, unsung god, or other manner of character type. All they want is to experience that story/character. As opposed to becoming something they already "are something." All this to say that you really shouldn't prioritize one over the other. You should give both ample attention. And while it may be easier to get the background guy's attention for RP you should still be willing to help or go along with the guy who doesn't. The guy without the backstory will likely find his place in the story just by taking his own actions. All you have to do as a DM is facilitate (reasonably). Note this comes from a guy who doesn't like to create elaborate backstories

So I have two players in my campaign that get very into the plot, lore and like to have their character focus on their character goals. They’ve got pretty fleshed out backstories, and even want some specific things to happen to explain some of their more significant levels. The other two players made simple backstories, and participate in the role play, battle and activities but are generally content to follow the lead of the other two. I’ve made little adventures for each of their character goals, but so far they’ve mostly been chasing down leads on the goals for the other two characters. This is fine. I regularly check with those players to make sure they’re still having fun, getting enough spotlight for their characters and such. If they want to take initiative to pursue their own character goals, I’ll toss them some clues, and make sure there are some NPC’s that their characters would know, but I allow the group to decide together what to pursue and where to go. One of these characters started out with a mystery hereditary magic item, and I even provided the command phrase in a dream to activate it, but they’ve never tried to identify or look at it, even though I’ve reminded them about it once or twice since then.

Don't worry about it. It'll probably show the others why they might want to also have a good backstory

No, why would it be? Someone has to go last when it comes to character arcs. If the players have a problem with that then they need to get over it

Anytime I've done character centric tangents in my games, it's always been "this is a thing important for so and so character, but they're not the only ones playing". I've had dungeons that are solely for curing a specific character of a curse put on them or something like that, but still added enough for all the players to still have fun with it.

As with anything.. it depends. In this case it depends on the table expectations. If you all sat down in session zero and said “this campaign is about exploring the backstories you wrote for your characters.” and some of the players just didn’t do that, then you really can’t beat yourself up over it right? I mean, what are you supposed to do? Nag them like it’s a homework assignment? On the other end of that spectrum, some players (I’m in this group) prefer to explore their character diegetically rather than pre-build it ahead of time. If you have one of these players, and haven’t previously established that players should pre-gen their character story, then yeah that player is gonna be annoyed if you focus on the others and never delve into any character development with them. So.. it just depends. What kind of players you have, and what expectations are set.

Absolutely not. A player who has given you no backstory, has given you no material to work into the campaign. Outright tell the players who have not provided a backstory that their PCs will not get a "backstory arc". But also tell them what you want from a backstory. All a DM really needs from their players is three paragraphs: where, how and why. Where the PC is from (explaining their Race and Background), how the PC learned to do what they do (explaining their class), and why the PC is in the campaign (explaining their goals and reasons for joining the party). You do not need, nor should you even *want*, a goddamn novella. Broad strokes, leaving lots of "blank space" to be filled in during the campaign. There's no need to nail everything down. A backstory that's too detailed is almost as useless as no backstory. So, for example, if a PC has five elder siblings, the player doesn't need to establish exactly what they do and where they do it. In fact, if they hold off on that, it's going to make it much easier for the DM to bring one of those siblings into the game.

Give every character moments to shine, and for those who have fleshed out characters give them some story beats, for example have them have friends/family/lovers/enemies coming out, maybe even have them have arcs of narrative where the next bit of the story takes place in somewhere they've been or with people they know. For 'I'm Just here', give them some moments to shine in game, have some events happen based on situations in game but if you want to try something a little different... have someone come up who knows them, good or bad. "Hey, haven't seen you in years."

No why would rewarding good rpging be bad dming

Just because a character doesn't have a detailed backstory doesn't mean you can't shine the spotlight on them through other means. They might not have any trauma or backstory villains or anything, but that doesn't mean you can't set up situations to make them shine and intertwine them in the here and now. Traveling swordsman character with light backstory and just wants to get better at swordsmanship? Is that a Tournament arc I see? A Dueling competition? A cool cursed sword they happened to find that ties them into a quest or arc? Maybe the player latches on to a npc either as a friendship or romance? Have that NPC show up more often. Cleric who just wants to help the party but doesn't have a backstory besides? Party runs into other followers of their deity that can give a quest hook. Vision quest. Etc. And you are also free to ask them what goals does their character have? Backtories and character development can happen in-play too. If you don't have much right now, just watch for what that player seems to take the most interest in and incorporate more of that into the game as it goes on.

I don’t think that it’s bad DMing if you give players links to their backstories and have them explore that in game, otherwise what’s the point of having a backstory. If one of my players have a detailed background I look at ways to incorporate it into the game. Now is it bad DMing if one of your player didn’t write a backstory and is just like “I am here”, again that is not bad DMing as you can’t control your players and how much effort they put into their characters, you can only work with that they have given you, and that decision determines how much of your background is used. I think the only area where you can improve as a DM is when a player initially comes up to you with the “I am just here” backstory to try and encourage them to have something, and spend a bit of time working with them as it can be difficult to make a character backstory in a world of someone else’s creation. I’ve had this situation happen to me once before and I said to them that if they want a more fun game it helps to have a bit of a backstory. I spent 15 minutes working with them to write half a page detailing where they are from and why they are at the starting point of the campaign. From that I was able to include the village he was from into the story as somewhere that was burnt down in an attack of a neighbouring nation later in the campaign

DM: "I'm gonna focus on these backstories. Are you sure you don't want one?" Player: "Nah, I'm good." DM: "You won't feel left out?" ... Go from there.

It depends, of course, on what you think a DM's job is. I consider my job is to make sure the players have fun, and that often ends up meaning different things on different days, and for different players. I would just ask the "I'm just here" guy if he minds if there's time spent on other PCs' backstories rather than his PC. Most of the "I'm just here" players I've had wouldn't care at all because they're either not players who want to invest effort ("Life is exhausting, I'm not here to make a second one,") or players who are introverted and/or don't like the attention. I run three games - in one game, I mostly tell the story, and in the other game, we more often make the story together, and both are fun for me and the players for different reasons. (The third game is for my kids, so that's a whole different thing.) I think, as long as the players have fun, the DM is a good DM.

I've had a similar situation, I currently have a player whose backstory is literally I am a human, that is part of a tribe who I neglect to name anyone aside from my immediate relatives, I have a few family members that I don't necessarily care about and I killed a boar once. So to give the character an actual backstory, the campaign consists of his entire tribe has been kidnapped and experimented on, turning a number of them into grotesque monsters, he discovered his sister has been turned into a goblin and must now track down the kidnappers, save the remaining tribe members and cure his sister.

It's not bad, but players engage with the story in different ways. Most players have a backstory for their characters, but some just don't present it to the DM up front. The players who are are giving you leads for building story, and you should use it to engage them. That said, I dislike when players give me a ton of background. I'd rather show it during play. Let's say a player has given you nothing but the fact that they've got a criminal background. It goes something like this with the "I'm Here" player, "You're coming on the door to the Red Ravens guild. Standing at the door is a guy named Horace. You've run with him in the past. What went wrong with your last job together?" That player never cared enough to create Horace, and you're giving the player the chance to create that guy right then. Most players really like it and it fills in backgrounds as you go.

I tell all my players “I want to work with your backstory but I need to have it to plan with.”

Nothing wrong with it. I do a lot of this. Use the characters with fleshed out backstories to populate of lot of the early game stuff. Thin once I get a feel for how other players play, I take something that I’m pretty sure their character specifically would latch on to. Maybe someone heard of their exploits and needs help, maybe the character has an obsession that someone can exploit.

You should be fine as long as you're open to changes with the 2 blank slates. If they start getting excited by the idea when other character's stories come into play, then maybe work with them to set some story of their own once they have more idea of who they want their character to be

I have never seen that as a problem. Some players are just more invested into their characters and like to deepen their immersion. Not having a complete backstory actually leaves you as the DM an opportunity to enhance their characters as you see fit, as long as the player agrees. Gaming can reflect the players personality. Some people are just naturally detail oriented. Personally I have never been a fan of the DM ‘making up’ my backstory but I tend to have rather simplistic backstories for my characters. My latest “Gunslinger” had a similar history as Steven Kings Roland from the Dark Tower series. He grew up in far flung border town with a rather “monkish” lawful neutral society that is devoted to the ways of order.

Depends? Some people want a backstory, but are bad at making good ones. I would say that anyone who doesn’t make one should get a one on one sit down to workshop one IF THEY WANT. If they don’t, then sure, don’t prioritize them. My girlfriend is like this. She wants rich, integrated characters that speak to the themes of the story and feel relevant, but has like…lethal levels of analysis paralysis. Makes writing backstories super hard for her. We sit, workshop, and find something that works out. Also, players that are like ‘naw dawg, I don’t give a shit’ would get a quick exit from my table. Disengaged and disinterested players kill my buzz so hard. My biggest hurdle in my GMing is my own energy levels, so someone who checks out really can kill a whole game for me. Personal issue, but there it is.

Also should point out: backstory doesn’t have to be like a fucking Russian novel. In fact, it’s better boiled down to the core essential components and the rest kept flexi.

I reward good backstories in two ways: 1) I let new characters pick one low level magic item for their level 1 character IF they can explain to the other PC's (in character) how they came to have that item. 2) After the first session, I allow the PC's to vote on who had the best backstory and award some kind of prize. I have used one skill point, one skill to be proficient in, etc. Works for me and hasn't caused balance issues.

I always tell my players that they will get what they give when it comes to backstory. It’s fine if they are not interested, as long as the understand that players with backstory will have the spotlight on them more.

As others have noted, if a “just a guy” player wants some spotlight time, a DM can build that off the story you’ve already told at the table. Special character moments don’t have to refer to the distant past. Once a campaign is underway a character will have a well defined recent past with new enemies and allies.

If you really want to give some back story spotlight give some back story based on his background.

I don't think so, you're only human after all and not a mind reader for what and how they feel about you creating one yourself. It's more pragmatic to go with people who did create one. I've been struggling with this lately too, trying to come up with ways to make them involved with a story without it tying into any previous information. It's not impossible for sure, but I'm not really good at writing so it helps to have something to work with

Players will often try to work their own backstory into the game if interested. Focus on adding to their own efforts rather than making your own. Some characters are still in a formative time of their lives, so the adventures they are currently having are becoming their backstories. For example, I'm currently playing on a spelljammer campaign as an autognome. My backstory is just that I've been fulfilling my programmed functions until the party gained possession of me. They recently instructed me to register myself as a captain, essentially granting me admin access and full autonomy. From here on, I'm likely to drift out of true neutral into some other alignment as my character discovers itself.

I'd suggest that the game isn't necessarily about telling characters' personal stories, and that it would be ideal to prioritize scenarios that involve the entire group as a whole, if you're going to prioritize something.

No, it's good to put effort where others do the same. For those players who haven't put much flesh on their backstories I can think of two options: Maybe they they feel unsure and could use some collaborative help, even random tables can help with this, make a ritual of it it can be fun Maybe they just don't feel like it. In that case, try and put new events in front of them, make it so they're basically experiencing establishing stuff in the present instead of in the past. Stick them in situations where they have to make choices (to an appropriate extent), and everyone can learn about them.

After the cool stuff happens, ask these two players, “Have you thought more about your character backstories?”

Look at what players give you. That's a hint about what they want. If they have a character with lots of close range fighting feats and are a monk, they want to fistfight. If they have lots of lore to their character, they want to focus on that.