Your Character's Backstory

[Guest Vulcan3324]

I was wondering how each of approaches our character's backstories, so I thought I'd start this topic.

 

Do you mostly discuss it in logs? How much does it affect your character in sim?

[Dumbass 0]

In my view your sim character should have some of the same attributes of your real life. I tend to put a lot of real-life experience into my characters. Makes it easier to sim if I am working with something I am already familiar with.

 

For example, I majored in economics in college so for my Qob character I gave my character a brief stint at the Ferengi School of Business. I also work with engineers in real life so I put a little bit of that in as well.

 

For my Agincourt character, where I played a Starfleet Marine, I put a lot of my experience in the US Army in my character.

 

For my Reaent character, since I am playing something I have no hope of being in real life (a fighter pilot), I cheated when I did my timeline and simply said "Details classified". (Then again this is a temporary character so it isn't worth my time to "flesh out".) But since I am a fan of the new Battlestar Galactica series I essentially made my character a rebellious Starbuck-type.

 

As a cadet, however, the most important thing you can do is keep your options open. You don't want to pigeon-hole yourself into simming a certain way because your Advanced Sim character and assignment can be completely different. Experiment. Try different things. That's what the Academies are for.

[WesleyMustDie 0]

Adina doesn't have much of a backstory since she's a temporary character.

 

T'Linna's backstory is developing as I develop the character...some background development has actually been in SIM, but most is in logs or in the bio at this point.

[Guest Vulcan3324]

I agree, especially with the cadet mention.

 

::wishes she had known that in the Academy::

[FredM 0]

Hey there,

 

In the beginning, way back when, I didn't have to create that much of a backstory for the character. I think sometimes people can put too much detail in a bio when first starting off. They essentially limit their exploration of the character and what it can become. Over time, you go into depth about events from the persons past.

 

I agree with what Dumbass said and will also point out something else. You may find yourself, after a long time, becoming restricted in the character you've built. For example, the "character" COing the Reaent is in fact the same character I started simming with back in June 1995. Now a lot has happened since then, most of which many wouldn't recall (though I know some do). However, for me personally, I know what the character "would" and "wouldn't" do in a situation. Sometimes you learn that you have to develop unique ways of telling the same history over and over.

 

One thing I do have to say is I do not believe Cadets should be "developing" characters. At that stage of the game, your focus should be on learning the mechanics and the rest. Once you get down how to do it, then you can worry about getting better at it. A big thing I am critical of are people who say they want to play a Vulcan, but then get upset when they are critized for showing emotion. Playing a true Vulcan is not easy and is something many experienced simmers simply don't do. In my lifetime, I've seen less than five people really play the role well. I think most people should probably start out with a character that they know they can play properly...to do otherwise really isn't fair to yourself or those around you.

[Guest Vulcan3324]

::makes a note to keep Sarvek and T'Parek as good Vulcans::

[FredM 0]

As we should never limit our Klingon exposure to Worf, neither should we limit our Vulcan exposure to Spock.

Hey there,

 

No...but in the case of Vulcans and Klingons, given the established history and society of the two species, you are limiting yourself in severe ways if you are going to be true to the character. Someone playing a person from Alpha Centuri will have more freedom to establish what is seen as a cultural norm than, let's say, someone who is playing a Bajoran. :lol:

[Garnoopy 0]

I think sometimes people can put too much detail in a bio when first starting off. They essentially limit their exploration of the character and what it can become. Over time, you go into depth about events from the persons past.

I agree with Fred. I think that in the case of a newly starting Ensign on an advanced sim, less is more. If you add too much right away, you corner yourself into that history. Trying to change, alter, or just add something can be a difficult task later on.

 

If you leave it open ended though, you have the ability to later on use open parts of your past for logs. You can compare things that are happening now, on an advanced sim, to things that may have happened in your past, say while at starfleet academy.

 

So, in my opinion, for your first bio, less is more.

[WxMurray 0]

The development of my two main characters took a little while to put together, but the main idea is that I sat down and put a lot of "me" into it. Both Wim and Saf are about my size and height; Wim, being my first character, is about my age (slightly older, actually - Saf was developed to be close to Wim's age in the same time reference (born about two years apart, but I play Saf as an older character because of Agincourt's time frame). Both have homes in places I am familiar with: Wim in Pennsylvania, my home, and Saf in Connecticut, where I also have family. This makes it much easier to talk about home because I know these places; they are familiar to me, based in reality (yes, places like St. Louis are based in reality, but I've never been there). When the bios say "shy, didn't have many friends", that's me, too. I've mentioned in a few Reaent logs that Wim's girlfriend, Cadet Sheila Simmons, goes back and forth between areas of study because she can't decide what she wants to do. I've never had that problem, but as a college student, I know that this happens to many people. Yet another "me" experience.

 

Each has hobbies similar to my own. I wrote a log for Agincourt where Saf's engineering away team is having a euchre competition, a game that I learned this summer and quite enjoy. Field games, classical music, hiking and camping, and canoeing (which I have done once and loved) are all hobbies of mine (or at least I'd like canoeing to be), and I have made those hobbies of my characters.

 

Some things, though, I have yet to decide on. I have had very little in-sim character development. It's something that's never come up. As a result, neither Wim nor Saf have siblings listed in their bios; that doesn't mean they don't have them, it's just that I haven't decided yet, and haven't really had a need to create them at this point.

 

My alternate Reaent character, Warner Murray, required a little less development because I based him heavily on his alternate counterpart Wimbley. I have described Warner's bio as "having many parallels and also some perpendiculars", basically saying that they're pretty much the same, but opposite in some ways. Wim's home is in rural Pennsylvania, Warner's is in a nearby city. Yet both have the same parents (albeit with different spellings), same hobbies, both went on leave of duties for training, and both have the undeveloped middle name whose initial is "X".

 

Despite all this information, I have left a lot of things open. I don't go into heavy detail about their lives; I would go crazy if I tried. When it comes to character development, it really shouldn't be done all at once. My first bio for Wimbley had very little background information in it at all; mostly general stuff, like a few personality traits and hobbies. It wasn't until I had time this summer (read: the beginning of the semester) that I decided to add a little background to his career. And Saf's away mission was a good time to add character development, as well as a few now-recurring NPCs (whom I sometimes end up talking to more in a sim than the real people! :P ). Those bios have remained deliberately brief, in part because of academics, in part because I just have no clue what I want to do with them at this point.

 

I'll stop rambling now. :lol: I'll just say that early on it's best not to put too much into it. Just let it come as time goes on. Trek writers don't know the details of every character; they have a base character that they add to throught the show. That pretty much applies here, too.

Edited November 9, 2005 by WxMurray

[Nicolas Lepage 0]

For my first character I used the KISS (kepp it simple stupid) principle. I decided to play a human simply because I have some experience being one. I made up some backstory like family and education but really not more than that. I do it pretty much like Murray. He's about my age and has similar experiences and hobbies for example. It's easy to play since I don't have to slip into another role even though there are some differences.

 

With my other character I experimented a bit. It's only a temporary character so I don't really have to worry about long term effects an action might have. So that guy is really different from my first character. It is fun to play two totally different personas especially since the second one is not a really pleasant person to be with.

 

The most important thing is to leave room for development. For example your character being in a serious relationship or even marriage right at the beginning might not be a good idea.

[Seiben 0]

I definately agree with the other. Originally, I made the mistake of making all my characters the exact same. In name, in appearance and in personal info. A big mistake, as playing the same exact person got boring fast - to the extent that I had to kill one of them off and create a new character for variety.

 

But be wared about that since some GMs don't allow this, or reduce you back to ensign no matter what your rank is. So, try to take some time and think your perspective character over. For your first bio, I agree in the less is more principle. You can always update your bio and add more info to your character as you progress in your advanced sim.

 

I find that most of my character development was done in logs, rather than sims especially if my character didn't have alot to do in the last sim. Logs are a great oppurtunity for character development as it gives you more flexibility. For my characters, I too have a little bit of me in every one of my characters (with the possible exception of my alternate Raeant character).

 

If you're playing multiple characters, I find that it's more fun having characters with different personalities. I try to make all my characters somewhat different than any other, to make them stand out and be a little more unique, again leaving a good potential for character development.

[Merina 0]

For the Regular Reaent I had to think of how caitians are, since i have no known knowledge of them.

 

The NFS Reaent, I'm just using my aegis character, but changed some of the things.

 

The Aegis, Same as the reaent and nfs reaent just fixed and added.

[Dumbass 0]

However, for me personally, I know what the character "would" and "wouldn't" do in a situation.

Whomever reads this should ask Huff about "Foot." :lol:

[Captain Huff 0]

Most of my characters' back-stories have been "developed" in 2 AM waking caffeine coma IM conversations.

[Travis Kroells 0]

Oy...where to start....

 

Travis, well the original Travis on the USS Reaent was almost entirely backstory driven. I dont know if it was because I was young, and thought it nessicary, or some other reason.

 

Jamie, my current main character is a lot more situational. I recently did a character development with him, but that was for an LOA I needed to take. More then that, I haven't had much time or drive to flush out a real story for him yet.

 

The new Travis, for the new Reaentverse will be rather versed. Expect plenty of backhistory logs, and such. It'll be odd, since I think this Travis will have more of a story the the original, who was on the Reaent for around 2 years or so...

[Nicolas Lepage 0]

Most of my characters' back-stories have been "developed" in 2 AM waking caffeine coma IM conversations.

I try to avoid that cos it's really kinda strange what twisted things your mind can come up with in those situations.

[Kansas_Jones 0]

I agree with the gist of what everyone said - less is more, and cadets really shouldn't try and "get it all in" the biography.

 

For both my characters on the Hood and Agincourt, I started with the basics: Age, family, education, and a few paragraph blurbs outlining general qualities (hyper, calm, walking attitude problem?).

 

Some of my own personality is present in both characters, minus the fur and tail :rolleyes: . I chose Medical on the Hood as a tribute to DeForest Kelley (I dont have an ounce of medical knowledge). I chose Security for Agincourt because 1.) a family member is in security and 2.) many of the first person shooter games I play have some element of tactics or a security type person (commando, WW2 soldier) as the main character.

 

I develop the chracters as I go, based on storylines, character logs/reactions to the sim stories, or my own real life experiences and feelings mixed in with the fantasy of Star Trek.

 

Bottom line is I dont think to hard about either character, even as I develop them -I just go with the flow and have FUN!

Edited November 12, 2005 by Kansas_Jones

[Dumbass 0]

It is always a pleasure to read a biography that's concise.

Van Roy's Bio:

6911.06: Born

0407.23ish: Promoted to LtSG

:rolleyes:

[Guest Vulcan3324]

::snickers::