The Best Tragic Backstory

[kibou]

So I think everyone knows that a lot of people can't stand those characters who IC go on about "My parents were killed in front of me while I could do nothing but cry and then I was captured by badguys and beat up and etc."


When you ask someone what kind of backstory they tend to give characters, they usually mention somewhere "I don't do overly tragic histories." I say that too.


However, saying that all characters can't have a sad background because they're all inherently bad is false, and in some rps a tragic backstory is almost required- like in rps that center around orphans, to give one example.


So, in your opinion, what's the best way to give your character a tragic backstory? What general kinds of tragic backstories do you think are best? What about writing characters with duel parent deaths- the big thing people look at as trying to make characters edgy or panhandling for pity?

 

[Atom]

I have a backstory I can share real quick lemme go get it.


 
This is for one of my characters and was an attempt to create an emotionally unstable character with loner tendencies using more realistic real world elements rather then the over used parental death.

Spoiler

Adelaide was born in Japan to two parents of American decent who had moved there years prior for work. Up until the age of ten her life was rather normal and free of stress. But around that time her father started to degenerate, his work schedule getting smaller, his free time more and more spent at the local bars. Nothing too noticeable yet. But when Adelaide turned 13 her father was laid off. Things began to become considerably darker after that. Her father spent more time in the bars, and when he did come home it was late, and Adelaide would either be awoken by the sounds of screaming and yelling, or worse. The soft sobbing ofher mother on the other side if the wall. Adelaide knew her father was hitting her mother, she could see the bruises the next day, and when whenever he raised his hand her mother would flinch. When he was drunk he was a menace, a thing to be avoided. Definitely not her father...but when he was sober, when he was himself, he was still her father, still her loving father. Adelaide came to hate the moments when he was drunk, and rely on the moments he was sober even more.


But when Adelaide was fourteen he left. Just disappeared. Adelaide and her mother never saw or heard from him again, and neither could bear his absence. Life became considerably more difficult after that, money was hard to come by, and Adelaide had to pick up an under the table job at a restaurant to help. It was during this time, when Adelaide was fifteen, that her life took another dive. One night Adelaide dropped a tray of dishes, shattering the entire thing. In anger the manager fired her right there, sending her home three hours early. And what she found there was something no little girl should ever have to discover. In their deficit of cash Adelaide's mother turned to the only thing she knew that could get money quick for large amounts.


Prostitution...


Adelaide and her mothers relationship decayed severly after this. Her mother quit, as Adelaide had requested, but it was still there, it had still happened. Her mother was ashamed of it, and Adelaide herself was stunned. Over the next four years went by slowly, and the two grew apart more and more. A fractured relationship that neither could manage to fix. Adelaide managed to secure a steady job, and get her own apartment by the time she was 18. She lived away from her mother for the next year, never visiting. Finally, after a year of never seeing or talking to her mother, Adelaide finally felt that maybe she could repair their relationship. When Adelaide finally visited she was torn apart by what she found. Her mother had once again devolved into a sorry state, harboring a serious drug addiction to heroine was at the pinnacle of her mother’s issues. Adelaide was shocked, and filled with regret. Her mother’s life had been hard, and rather than assist her she’d shunned her, and only quickened her spiral to this point in life.


Adelaide felt life couldn’t get worse at this point, definitely at her lowest point. She quickly contacted the proper authorities and had her mother put into rehab, forking out the cost to maintain it. She then came into a slight depression and lack of motivation to do anything but her work. Many noticed this and grew concerned as they watched her in her day to day life. It was finally, at the request of another, that Adelaide take up a hobby, and so she chose, in an interest to escape reality, gaming. And to even further this interest she decided to start with SAO...her first mistake...

 

[Circus]

I don't like to mix up tragic with interesting. I think there are a lot of different ways to express character growth without tragedy.


That being said, to answer your questions, I find good tragic backstories are the simplest. Pick one tragedy (death, abandonment, abuse) and make that the central focus. Too many tragic events sound over the top and have the opposite impact, in my personal opinion. People talk about about "mary sues" and what not, and I find that the "tragic" character is just as plain and bland as a "mary sue".


Overall, I think character development comes from writing as the character rather than having the most interesting background. Development in-game is more important than trying to cram it all in a CS.

 

[Atom]

I don't like to mix up tragic with interesting. I think there are a lot of different ways to express character growth without tragedy.
That being said, to answer your questions, I find good tragic backstories are the simplest. Pick one tragedy (death, abandonment, abuse) and make that the central focus. Too many tragic events sound over the top and have the opposite impact, in my personal opinion. People talk about about "mary sues" and what not, and I find that the "tragic" character is just as plain and bland as a "mary sue".


Overall, I think character development comes from writing as the character rather than having the most interesting background. Development in-game is more important than trying to cram it all in a CS.

I've always found the best characters are made when the creator of said character actually bases their personality from their backstory perfectly and explains exactly why the act the way they do.

 

[The One Eyed Bandit]

I've always found the best characters are made when the creator of said character actually bases their personality from their backstory perfectly and explains exactly why the act the way they do.

I usually work on personality first, and background second, and in my experience the vice versa of this works just as well. As long as they justify eachother, you've got the start of something good on your hands. Though, I don't think you need to implicitly tell the reader than character has trait X because of event Y, letting them connect point A to point B is far more effective, IMO.


Though, I'm guessing you didn't me implicitly telling them, BUT I GOTTA COVER THE BASES YA'KNOW?

 

[Circus]

I see your point and I think that the personality doesn't have to perfectly line up with their backstory. A character can be happy even if a parent dies. Just like in real life, one event can have a major impact on a character, but it does not have to define a person.

 

[The One Eyed Bandit]

I see your point and I think that the personality doesn't have to perfectly line up with their backstory. A character can be happy even if a parent dies. Just like in real life, one event can have a major impact on a character, but it does not have to define a person.

Ahyah, I may be interjecting here, actually, I AM interjecting here, but that's the point of having them justify eachother, like you say one event can have a major impact on a character, but it does not have to define a person, and fundamentally, the kind of person that is going to overcome tragedy and the kind of person who gives into it are going to react differently to the situation, therebe the personality justifying the back-story via their reaction, even if the events are the same. BUT (again, like you said) it's not going to not impact them at all, every major event leaves some sort of an impact, especially tragic ones, so you work that into the personality in whatever way you do.


Oh, and by-the-by, I'm not disagreeing with you, you're right. Just expanding on the previous.


I should probably discuss the purpose of the thread now that I'm here though.


...just after i get some sleep...

 

[kibou]

[QUOTE="The One Eyed Bandit]
I should probably discuss the purpose of the thread now that I'm here though.

[/QUOTE]
Although I think some of the things you guys are talking about could answer a portion of the original question, I'd love this because we're starting to get a teeeny bit off-topic. xD Even though I do love reading civil discussion....


Although, sleep is much more important... So I'll excited(but patient)ly await your return :>

 

[spiderlegs]

The tragedy itself, its size and scope, are all irrelevant compared to the effect it had on the character. Did they retreat or lash out? Conceal or share? And how did this shape their current behavior and worldview? I think roleplayers (and writers in general) tend to overlook or oversimplify the effect of personal tragedy, either erasing it entirely, or falling back on conventional coping mechanisms (often revenge, or Batman-esque crusades). In reality, people react to tragedy in all kinds of ways depending on their personality and circumstances. Capturing that, or trying to, can make the tragedy more real (and more interesting).

 

[QuirkyAngel]

I've never cared one way or another about tragic back stories. To me, back stories are just that...back stories. They have little relevance in the rp unless the rper makes it so. I don't pity overly tragic characters, nor do I hate them, though if an rp is full of tragic gloomy characters, I'd imagine it'd be a pretty depressing rp. I'll be annoyed of a character that focuses too much on their past, but that falls in line with my personal dislike of self-pitying characters...nothing to do with the tragedies themselves.

So, in your opinion, what's the best way to give your character a tragic backstory? What general kinds of tragic backstories do you think are best? What about writing characters with duel parent deaths- the big thing people look at as trying to make characters edgy or panhandling for pity?

In my opinion the best way to create a tragic backstory is, like Circus said, to focus on one major tragedy and stick to it. If your character's tragedy is being poor, focus on the negative results of having no money in a materialistic world. If your character's tragedy is witnessing the death of both your parents, focus on the trauma of that...and possibly the after affects of having no parents. Don't suddenly add your character was also raped, sold as a slave, etc. unless you have a particular reason for it(like your character's parents were killed by bandits, then your character was sold as a slave. That at least makes sense-.-). Just tacking on random tragedies will make it just seem like a random series of unfortunate events, which while possible, isn't very realistic. Though I'd imagine some rps aren't meant to be realistic...so, it's really based on the rpers preference...


I think the best back stories are the one that flows logically. There's a reason for that tragedy to be there other than it just being there for the sake of being there...like it plays a part in the character's personality and their development or something. But like I said, it's just my personal taste =P


Nothing wrong with dual parent death. I have had characters that lost both their parents. One because of war, though he barely remembers his parents so it didn't affect him badly and he was taken care of by a kindish guardian. It did, however, drive his desire to follow his parents' occupation and become a ninja. Another character killed his own parents because he was possessed by a demon. That character eventually grew to hate demons and magic...eventually becoming a demon hunter of sorts.


 

The tragedy itself, its size and scope, are all irrelevant compared to the effect it had on the character. Did they retreat or lash out? Conceal or share? And how did this shape their current behavior and worldview? I think roleplayers (and writers in general) tend to overlook or oversimplify the effect of personal tragedy, either erasing it entirely, or falling back on conventional coping mechanisms (often revenge, or Batman-esque crusades). In reality, people react to tragedy in all kinds of ways depending on their personality and circumstances. Capturing that, or trying to, can make the tragedy more real (and more interesting).

I agree with you that many people oversimplify/overlook the effect of personal tragedies. Just because a character has fewer tragic events happening to them doesn't mean they are less sad/tragic. It's the impact of the tragedy that matters. Instead of trying to add more tragedies, I think it's much more tragic for a character that has one deep personal tragedy that really affected them. Rather than a character whose had a bunch of sad things happen in their life, so much that the character should already be used to it, isn't it more tragic for a character to have had everything they ever wanted, then lose everything in a single swoop? Also, everyday tragedies can have the same effect as major tragedies if rped right. For example, a character that doesn't fit in with their society because their ideas/views are too different. That character undoubtedly suffers from loneliness and lack a sense of belonging...which is kind of the same feelings a character might receive after having their parents killed. A tragedy is a tragedy no matter how "big" or "small", but the impactfulness of the tragedy depends on the characters themselves and how they choose to handle it.


I agree that trying to capture how a character handles their personal dilemmas is what makes tragedies more real...though I'm not sure I think that makes them more interesting. I think revenge driven characters like batman are very interesting...provided that they are rped correctly of course

 

[spiderlegs]

 



I agree with you that many people oversimplify/overlook the effect of personal tragedies. Just because a character has fewer tragic events happening to them doesn't mean they are less sad/tragic. It's the impact of the tragedy that matters. Instead of trying to add more tragedies, I think it's much more tragic for a character that has one deep personal tragedy that really affected them. Rather than a character whose had a bunch of sad things happen in their life, so much that the character should already be used to it, isn't it more tragic for a character to have had everything they ever wanted, then lose everything in a single swoop? Also, everyday tragedies can have the same effect as major tragedies if rped right. For example, a character that doesn't fit in with their society because their ideas/views are too different. That character undoubtedly suffers from loneliness and lack a sense of belonging...which is kind of the same feelings a character might receive after having their parents killed. A tragedy is a tragedy no matter how "big" or "small", but the impactfulness of the tragedy depends on the characters themselves and how they choose to handle it.


I agree that trying to capture how a character handles their personal dilemmas is what makes tragedies more real...though I'm not sure I think that makes them more interesting. I think revenge driven characters like batman are very interesting...provided that they are rped correctly of course

I should clarify that when I say "real" I use it as a catchall for "well-rounded", "believable", and "dynamic". A revenge-motivated character can be all these things--but more often, I think they allow us to live out certain common fantasies, as they typically give a satisfying (perhaps violent) solution to the world's evils. The symbolic loss in the origins of these stories echoes our own loss of innocence, and their vengeful crusades are typically aimed at righting wrongs in very tangible, simple, and often violent ways. Through them, we act the way we wish we could (with a few controversial exceptions, like Batman's no-kill rule).


There's nothing inherently wrong with fantasy-fulfilling stories. They're deeply, almost viscerally satisfying--but that doesn't make their protagonists interesting. Good writing does. Which, due to the nature of comics, comes and goes for Batman. It's the same way in roleplays: a character's motivations and behavior can be deeply satisfying, allowing you to act on whatever urges you have to keep in check IRL. But the people around you don't necessarily get that satisfaction from your character. To entertain them, you can try a number of tactics (humor, surprise, sex) but in my eyes the complex, well-rounded, and believable character is the most reliable method.

 

[QuirkyAngel]

I should clarify that when I say "real" I use it as a catchall for "well-rounded", "believable", and "dynamic". A revenge-motivated character can be all these things--but more often, I think they allow us to live out certain common fantasies, as they typically give a satisfying (perhaps violent) solution to the world's evils. The symbolic loss in the origins of these stories echoes our own loss of innocence, and their vengeful crusades are typically aimed at righting wrongs in very tangible, simple, and often violent ways. Through them, we act the way we wish we could (with a few controversial exceptions, like Batman's no-kill rule).
There's nothing inherently wrong with fantasy-fulfilling stories. They're deeply, almost viscerally satisfying--but that doesn't make their protagonists interesting. Good writing does. Which, due to the nature of comics, comes and goes for Batman. It's the same way in roleplays: a character's motivations and behavior can be deeply satisfying, allowing you to act on whatever urges you have to keep in check IRL. But the people around you don't necessarily get that satisfaction from your character. To entertain them, you can try a number of tactics (humor, surprise, sex) but in my eyes the complex, well-rounded, and believable character is the most reliable method.

Yes, I definitely see your point. Good writing does make the character. I guess, I just find dramatic characters more interesting than normal ones. That's a personal preference I'm afraid. Well, rounded characters are great, but too well rounded runs the risk of being boring for me. The typical normal guy is definitely more realistic than the deranged pyschopath...but I find the deranged psychopath more entertaining to read if written correctly. I've written complex characters...and I've written simple characters with one or two defining traits. I love them both^^

 

[DemonKitten]

Most my characters have tragic back-stories, but only one had a cold personality because of it. I had a girl that murdered her whole family, ripped them to pieces. A character made of poison that watched her whole world destroyed but could do nothing because she was unable to touch anyone due to instant death if she got near so she was forced to just stay there and watch the destruction because of her selfish desire to marry who she wanted. I also had twins, whose mother was an angel that had a forced pregnancy and the children were experimented on and tortured, but only the boy remembers and tries to protect his sister from her past. Needless to say, I don't like happy stories.

 

[AlexSilverX]

I think a good tragic back-story is one that justifies character traits. For example, if a character doesn't thrust easily, it would make sense for his background to include a betrayal. If the character is boorish, it would make sense that he is an orphan (nobody taught him manners). If the character is shallow, it could be justified in that he's had a lot of bad experiences with "ugly" people (this can be truth in story-telling as well; a lot of people associate "ugly" with "evil" because children's stories usually depict villains as unattractive). If the character is insecure, it could be because of a history of bullying, etc.


I underlined "justifies" above because it needs to actually be something justifiable to begin with. If the character's trait is inconvenient to the point of making him impossible to RP with, then the backstory element doesn't make sense. Likewise, if someone has too many tragic elements to their story, they need to have at least some redeemable trait that would justify them not just committing suicide after all of that. Humans have a pain threshold both physical and mental, after all.


This is, of course, personal opinion, but I believe that the characters where "very" (border-lining "overly") tragic back-stories fit the most are villains. It makes a lot more sense to be a complete prick or a monster when the character has a reason. Likewise, I have difficulty sympathizing or even understanding the behavior of a guy that just woke up one morning and said; "I feel homicidal today. Time to murder my parents in cold blood and start my reign of terror." It's just not something I see happening... though there are exceptions; if done well, the "chaotic psychopath with no logic or reason" CAN be a cool character to interact or even be in the same universe as.


A sad fact however is that - while this side of it is inconvenient - overly tragic stories is also "truth in story-telling". Bad events usually tend to have a snowball effect to them.

Spoiler

Because Mary is poor, she doesn't want children, which she could not afford to raise.


Because Mary is poor, she lives in a poor neighborhood, where crimes are statistically higher.


Because Mary lives in a place where it is more likely, she is the victim of a rape.


Because Mary was raped, she becomes pregnant. Again, Mary is poor, so while she doesn't want the child, she cannot afford to get an abortion.


Because Mary is pregnant with an unwanted child, she goes into depression.


Because Mary is depressed, she copes with alcohol and drugs.


Because Mary does alcohol and drugs while pregnant, the baby is born malformed.


Because Mary's baby is born malformed, Mary starts hating herself for taking drugs and alcohol.


Because Mary can't live with herself, she hangs herself.


Because Mary hangs herself - and its father was a rapist - the child is an orphan.


Because the orphan is malformed, people don't adopt it.


Because the orphan is not adopted, she unintentionally leeches off the system.


Because the orphan leeches off the system, the people of the orphanage abuse her.


Because the orphan is abused, they develop a "victim" mindset.


Because the orphan is a "victim", criminals and bullies can tell.


Because criminals and bullies can tell, the orphan gets robbed, beaten, and - sometimes - raped.


Because the orphan is criminally abused, they start doing drugs to cope.


Because the orphan does drugs, they develop a mental illness (statistically, drugs are a potential cause of mental illness)


Because the orphan is mentally ill, they cannot get a job.


Because the orphan can't get a job, they are poor.


Because the orphan is poor, it doesn't want children, which it could not afford to raise.


Because the orphan is poor, it lives in a poor neighborhood, where crimes are statistically higher.


... ... ...


-insert loop-


So in a way, characters like this, while way too common to be realistic, have real life counterparts and so are "realistic".

 

[Semblance]

I feel like the good tragic stories should have some sort of natural cause in them. For example, death of a loved one due to cancer or disease or being born into a poor family who had to struggle for family. Both of these stories involve some sort of natural cause, instead of having an abusive parent or a suicidal sibling.


I also think that back stories should focus on one tragedy. Whether it be death, abusive parent, suicidal family member, or physical illness, the roleplayer should center their history around that one event and elaborate on its effects on the character. Too many tragedies make it seem unrealistic and fishing for pity.