There have always been complaints about the background standards we've had in SRS. They've been relaxed considerably in the last year, but since we're warming up for NS, I figured I'd list what the current criteria are, so you guys can comment on what we do/don't need. You can argue against a bg at all, if you want. Just be constructive.

1. Skills over 4 must be explained in a few lines in the bg. 'Unusual' skills must also be explained, i.e., if the PC was raised in a ninja pirate shadowrunner school, how did s/he learn much about square dancing?

2. Essence must be over 2; body index must be under 3. Bg must explain when the 'ware was installed and how it was paid for.

3. Contacts level 2 and up must be described. (This is really mostly for RPS, so they know what to NPC if the need arises.)

4. The bg must have a sense of the PC's personality. Not just explanations of skills and 'ware... a real personality.

5. The bg must be logical and thematic.

And that's about it. There are a few things that come up on a regular basis (why does the guy have 17 SINS when there's no decker mentioned in the bg). The things most people have trouble with are the logic/thematic one and the personality one. Now, discuss.

I really like the way BG standards have gone lately, toward making it less of a barrier to getting people in the game. We need everyone we can get, and thank Ghost that gone are the days of having to write 30+ pages just to be allowed to have a competent shadowrunner.

That said, I like these standards, with the exception of #2. This seems to me to be a pernicious carry-over of the old, 'don't trust the PC, he's gonna twink out!' idea that has always spawned mistrust and fear between staff and players. SR4 has already gone a long way in making chargen characters lower-powered; we have no need to implement restrictions on top of that. If you can make it legally in chargen, and can come up with a plausible (and short) explanation, you should be able to play it.

Well, it's going to change with the new rules, but I'll explain the reasoning behind the current rule (which I'll point out was relaxed from essence 3, body index 3). If a PC comes onto the grid chromed to the gills, there isn't a lot of room for them to develop and add to the PC. They tend to get locked into a particular role, and the PC becomes unplayable (assuming s/he survives) faster than if they had chosen just a few pieces of 'ware to start with. Gives people some reachable IC goals and creates opportunities for RP with the game's cyberdocs.

*nod* I've heard that reasoning before. I can see where it makes sense on the surface, but I do think it deeply flawed for several reasons. The first is that it assumes that if you come out of CG with decent 'ware, you've somehow hit the top of the game and have no other place to go. But that's simply not true, with availabilities and the nuyen limits from the rules and with the new lowered skills you come out with. There's -plenty- of room to get better.

The second is that it contains the tacit assumption that the entirety of a player's goals is to shovel just one more bit of chrome into their PC. Which is at best patronizing, and at worst just another throwback to the 'don't trust the player with anything' bad old days that I keep mentioning.

The third reason is probably the most important. While superficially this reasoning seems beneficial, the real message of it is 'we're the staff, and we know better than you how to play your PC.' It caters only to the  lowest common denominator, and treats players like little kids who can't be trusted with the candy, led by the nose by admins who somehow know your PC's motivations better than you, the player, does.

If you can make it in the book and justify it in a BG, you should be able to play it.

Well, here's another idea we've been playing with vaguely. Use the bg solely for story and personality description. We're hoping to include in the new chargen a question generator, that actually just asks PCs to answer questions about unusual things in their +sheet. Thus, the bgs themselves would be much shorter and more direct. Opinions?

I really like this idea. It fits our new emphasis on story and narrative and character, rather than barriers and automation.

Back in the day (I actually was a PHer once ) we used to always be worried that if people didn't have to sit down and write a detailed BG, we'd get hordes of PKilling twinks running out of chargen. But since then, I've played places that don't require hardly anything in the way of a BG, and since the game had a very strong RP emphasis (as Seattle always has had), they never really had a problem with it. Sure, once in a blue moon you get an MMORPG refugee who doesn't understand the concept of a roleplaying MUSH, but they're a rare, self-solving problem.

I like this idea.

Well I hate to do background, not cause I think they are not usefull most the opposit I think a BG helps a lot in thinking up a player but for the simple reason that I'm horrible at it and can hardly come up with something I really like unless I invest a lot time into it, more then I acutally like for 'just getting started'.
So I definetly like the idea to have some questions to climb along, even the 30(or was it less?) question room was a great help to get some idea what one should put in the BG so a thumb up for that on my side

I think that we need to have some fairly decent BG requirments here. While I do know a lot of places don't have strigent BG requirments and everything turns out fine, other games can usually get a few folks that know what their doing and run the RP themselves. As far as I've seen, we've lost a lot of some of the oldbies that really got RP moving. And this is Shadowrun. No, I'm not using that term to validate an overly gritty game. I am using it to note that there are plenty of people out there who come and just play... street sammie #5. We're not getting the folks that run grand plots at random, especially with no unified player groups (a lot of other places can have characters in various factions).

The word thematic scares me. But then again, it always has... damn Freemasons (/crazy)

Yea and behold, the big bad bg enforcer speaks.

Just some basic things. The reason I've always wanted 'ware explained that's a lot and odd is to avoid some situations, like a sixteen year old with a .2 Essence.  If you think about your character as more than a sheet, you'll know how he got the chrome anyway, so it shouldn't make much difference adding it to a BG.  If you have a problem figuring out why your peace loving monk has eye guns, then you're creating a sheet, not a character.  Numbers don't roleplay.

Maybe it's just me, but I've always created the sheet and BG at the same time.  Notes of a character idea, a basic sheet, fleshing out the character, redoing the sheet, tweaking.  Even if you create the sheet first, you still have an idea of why you have all the stuff you do, it shouldn't be a problem to write it out. 

And I've played some places where you don't have a sheet, but need a background.  The places I've played where you don't need a background haven't been very interesting to me.  You get a character out there, meet someone then go "Uh oh, what's my character supposed to do here..."  Everyone has their good and bad points about games.  Seattle has always been background intensive.  Right now it's like sticking a bandaid on a foot long gash in your arm to get in, rather than the old 'stitch it up' requirements.

What Noor said is good, personality and a sense of self is what we look for most and is the most important.  Personally, all the bits that people yell about should automatically be a part of the story so shouldn't be a big deal in my eyes.  The automated thingie is good.  If we have uncompatibilities we could tie that into the system too. 

I hate writing backgrounds.

My instinct is usually, guys, I can RP. Just approve my character. I haven't /decided/ what quirks my character has, and half the time on old Seattle, I'd write this big old bg, get my mage approved, and /one month/ after actively playing, I'd reread my BG and go...uh. That isn't my character anymore. What the heck was I thinking?

I'd really really like some way to UPDATE questions/answers or something so I can add enemies and friends and remove quirks that don't exist or add in quirks that develop.

I am the exact opposite. I work out the background before I start working on the sheet. I let the background guide the skills and attributes I choose, as well as how I RP once I hit the grid. When I create a PC, I'm trying to create a person. Somebody who's not me. Who doesn't react the way I do.

Does the character's history evolve over time? Of course, it's only natural that experiences change the way people perceive the world. But if I didn't have the bg to start with, I'd have no sense of the person I'm playing.

That's just me, though. I don't really expect anybody else to play that way.

Hey, People don't change after a certain age, who needs to update...

I know, we'll have a merit called 'I can change, I chaaaange', and we'll have a 'Near Death Experience' flag that lets you update your background and then gives it a 10% chance of not being reverted to the way it was before hand.

well I think it is not wrong when a character develops, over time for sure. sure a pacifist who whithout reason creates a massacre after one week on the grid definetly need a damn good explenation but everyone develops. I would even encurage that characters develop during their stay on the grid, noone is imune to influence from the outside.
Don't missunderstand me I don't mean a 180degree swtich of attitude but staying 100% static would be wrong as wrong too

Honestly, I think that the background standards are good.  I don't know why so many people have a problem with writing a background. It's my favorite part.  I spend hours thinking up my character for several mushes and stop playing because the players don't want to include in a new player or try to force the characters around them to the way they want them to act to the point of acting ooc and oop.

But the current restrictions, I think should really be only placed for new players who has either never or rarely played shadowrun.  (such as me.)  Although I tried playing it several times, the first time being long ago when 30 page bgs were common and another time earlier.  The first time I had an essence close to 0.  Thought that the 6 essence was the amount that I can use.

Being one of these old people who grew up with "More BG than God(tm)" I am a fan of less background. Now I would like to see an option for those of us who are prolific writers who want to create a novel based on their character (and do it well not some killing checklist) maybe to get rewarded for it.

I remember years ago with my first character on the grid I actually got a karma bonus for my background. It totally made my day. I don't know I go either way on the restrictive background thing. True your average GM might let you start with that used, beta, wired three but in a game where almost everyone is a pc :shrugg:

I hope to play either way. Maybe a Decker this time