Dragging a rounded character out of them, kicking and screaming.

[Drakevarg]

Last week my hard drive exploded, making me lose all my data since the last time I bothered backing it up (which was three months ago). As a direct result I've been forced to restart the 3.5 campaign I'd been running, since all my data was on the computer. Just as well, since I was considering killing the party off anyway and making them roll more motivated characters.

So by popular vote the campaign is being moved from the frozen ****hole of Isande Helvete to the desert ****hole of Ordo Equitum Solis. In preparation for this, I had each of them answer a 51 question survey about their characters (normally 53 questions, but two of them didn't make any sense in context). And before you start complaining about how time consuming this must be, we managed to get six people to answer every question AND roll an entire character sheet (minus the equipment of two players) during a single session.

The problem comes in from the fact that depite answering 51 questions about their characters, somehow they still manage to come out flat. Or at least, I think so. Here's what I've got:

The Nomads:
Darius Vajheer- Hunter (TWF Warrior 3 [See sig.]). Sickly as a child, as he got older he became much stronger and is now probably the largest man in the tribe, standing at 6' 5". Accidentally caused the deaths of his party on his first hunt ever when he unintentionally released a spirit creature of some sort. Has no real long-term goals.

(My problem here is not his depth so much as his utter lack of initiative.)

Al-Ed Lladnar- Hunter (Rogue 3 (Didn't pick combat style yet.) [See sig.]). Sadistic bully and thief. Obsessed (as in stalker-ish) with Darius's sister Neela. Murdered his little brother Anep because he wasn't being given enough attention. Twin brother of Atem. Apart from wanting to win Neela's heart (she's married) and move out of the desert, has no real goals to speak of.

(Bored of sociopaths, as I told the party when we started this. And apart from his Stalker With A Crush thing, has no real goals.)

Atem Lladnar- Hunter (TWF Rogue 3 [See sig.]). Twin brother of Al-Ed. Only real backstory that isn't "followed his twin around" is his completely unexplained romance with some girl named Akasha. Wants to be leader of the tribe, apparently just 'cause.

(Probably the worst of the nomads despite having an actual goal. Just completely flat.)

The Others:
Osama Jamal- Soldier (Archer Rogue 3 [See sig.]). Sniper and siege engineer for the Imperial Legions, began Walking The Earth after he came home from his first tour of duty to find his entire hometown burned to the ground. Apart from seeking revenge on the people who did this, has no real direction in life. Is gay, in case that is relevent beyond giving the appearance of depth.

(While he has plenty of potential plot hooks simply by being military, apart from enjoying his job he doesn't have much about him.)

Aranesp Peste- Criminal (Archer Rogue 3 [See sig.]). Spoiled brat, kicked out of his home to make a life for himself. After piddling around as a petty thief for a few years, decided he wanted to be emperor. Without anything remotely resembling success, he's since been trying to build up an organization to overthrow the government. Has a massive ego combined with severe issues with authority.

(Probably my favorite of the lot, I see him becoming the party's face. Suprising, considering the shiftless idiot he played in the last campaign. Has motivation and character depth, something that every other member of the party either has very little or none of at least one category.)

Xumi Sanddancer- Hunter (Archer Rogue 3 [See sig.]). A wallflower. Seriously. Has been raised by a pleasant family, has had nothing exiting happen in her life, and has no goals beyond raising a family of her own.

(Worst in the party. No goals, no plot hooks in her backstory, and not even any real explaination of how she managed to gain military-level skills despite doing nothing but shoot deer.)

So there's what I have to work with. While I can probably work most of these into a plot, my issue is that most of them almost seem to be actively avoiding having any sort of catalysts toward an interesting campaign. How do I get them to write characters that actually have some reason to go out and do something?

[LansXero]

Sorry if it comes off the wrong way, but if I had to answer 51 questions before playing a character I'd make a pretty flat one too. It seems like tedium may have hit your players :(

[Animefunkmaster]

Whenever I Start a new campaign I usually start with a straight forward scenario that puts the party together. If people have an elaborate back story and would like to share we go around and explain everything. However more often then not, picking a complete and interesting history out of the blue is difficult. For me backstory takes a massive amount of time and as players have mutual respect for each other, they shape there character and conveniently retcon a few things so each one has there nich (respect is a big thing so we don't have competing histories).

Starting a new campaign I have two things I want to know about a character (aside from stats). What is your motivation(s)? What is your personality like? These can be as long or short as the player wants and can be flexible (lets face it, television and media constantly change back story to fit it's needs). But at least it gets you to a place you can start crafting a campaign and guesstimating party dynamics.

[Drakevarg]

Whenever I Start a new campaign I usually start with a straight forward scenario that puts the party together. If people have an elaborate back story and would like to share we go around and explain everything. However more often then not, picking a complete and interesting history out of the blue is difficult. For me backstory takes a massive amount of time and as players have mutual respect for each other, they shape there character and conveniently retcon a few things so each one has there nich (respect is a big thing so we don't have competing histories).

Starting a new campaign I have two things I want to know about a character (aside from stats). What is your motivation(s)? What is your personality like? These can be as long or short as the player wants and can be flexible (lets face it, television and media constantly change back story to fit it's needs). But at least it gets you to a place you can start crafting a campaign and guesstimating party dynamics.

If I was running a casual campaign I might consider doing this, since really the characters just exist as an excuse for Adventure!(TM). However, my campaigns are always extremely story-based; indeed this is probably the only reason I'm allowed to DM, considering my player-killing habits. So when my players fail to supply me with characters that have an actual motivation to go out and participate in the story, I'm left with nothing for them to do except maybe slaughtering all their loved ones and hope they vow revenge.

[molten_dragon]

It sounds like there might be a disconnect between the kind of campaign you want to run and the kind your players want to play in.

It seems like (and you confirmed) you want to run a sandbox-style campaign where most things are driven by the characters' motivations. Maybe your players don't really want to do that. Maybe they just want a more casual campaign where they don't feel like they have to be the catalyst for any adventures that happen.

[FelixG]

You could build a rather generic story to start with then sink the hooks into your characters as they progress and fall into their characters lives a bit more.

Most of the time when I make a character he is just sort of there until I play him for a few sessions then his motivations and ideas fall into line for me. Characters are a LOT more fun and organic if they flow instead of being set up on the spot because of a series of questions.

If that doesnt appeal to you why dont you find a life path generator (Traveller and Mech Warrior and Mekton Zeta RPGs come to mind) and have them roll up a random life, normally that yields exciting interesting lives for the characters before they started to adventure while leaving the character personalities up to your players.

It is likely a lot faster than 50 different questions as well

[Kami2awa]

51-53 questions is a LOT. Are these yes/no questions? I don't think I've ever even taken a 51-question exam for a real-life qualification, and I don't think I could answer 51 questions about people I've met in real life!

Do you think the player might be happier with, say, 5-10? Such as:

1) Does your PC have any family?

2) What does the PC do in their spare time?

3) What do they want most?

4) What would they do with it if they got it?

5) Name one favourite thing they have (e.g. favourite food, colour etc.)

6) Who do they consider friends?

7) Who is their best friend?

8) Have they ever been in love?

9) Is there anyone they dislike?

10) Are they afraid of anything in particular?

[BayardSPSR]

I doubt you could get much more out of them before you're started to play; as far as I've seen, motivations tend to pop up during the first few sessions. Motivations cannot exist in a vacuum; there must be a catalyst. Lacking a catalyst, there's only so much people are going to be willing to offer.

I would advise starting play, and seeing if any motivations develop. If they don't, murder a few NPCs they've gotten to like or burn a village or something; that might get them going. If all else fails, enslave them; they'll almost definitely try to escape. If they don't, there's no more that can be done. If you don't have motivations, you don't have a game.

On a related note, I'm in the process of trying to draw a game I'm running to a close, mostly because what motivations exist for the players' characters have absolutely nothing to do with each other and almost nothing to do with what's actually going on in the world around them. Ah well.

[Tyndmyr]

Last week my hard drive exploded, making me lose all my data since the last time I bothered backing it up (which was three months ago). As a direct result I've been forced to restart the 3.5 campaign I'd been running, since all my data was on the computer. Just as well, since I was considering killing the party off anyway and making them roll more motivated characters.

Players tend to grow attached to their characters over time. Try to force killing them off if it can be avoided. For instance, if characters need motivation, you can add motivations to existing characters. Ask players what things interest them, and work them into the plot.

Sure, it sucks that you lost campaign notes, but you can always take a different direction from where you are now.

So by popular vote the campaign is being moved from the frozen ****hole of Isande Helvete to the desert ****hole of Ordo Equitum Solis.

Sounds like it's time for Sandstorm.

In preparation for this, I had each of them answer a 51 question survey about their characters (normally 53 questions, but two of them didn't make any sense in context). And before you start complaining about how time consuming this must be, we managed to get six people to answer every question AND roll an entire character sheet (minus the equipment of two players) during a single session.

>an entire session on character creation? Brutal. We generally have new people get a character built in the first half hour of the session. They're playing in the first hour...and we spend a *lot* of time messing around.

With >50 questions, people are gonna get bored, and just start trying to get through the questions. Personally, I would answer them as briefly and hilariously as possible. It'd probably not be helpful.

The problem comes in from the fact that depite answering 51 questions about their characters, somehow they still manage to come out flat. Or at least, I think so. Here's what I've got:

Well, yeah. It's 51 questions. You're not gonna get an essay.

The Nomads:
Darius Vajheer- Hunter (TWF Warrior 3 [See sig.]). Sickly as a child, as he got older he became much stronger and is now probably the largest man in the tribe, standing at 6' 5". Accidentally caused the deaths of his party on his first hunt ever when he unintentionally released a spirit creature of some sort. Has no real long-term goals.

(My problem here is not his depth so much as his utter lack of initiative.)

Feh. Easy enough to throw plot hooks for. Accidentally caused deaths in his tribe? Yeah, if that doesn't justify them wanting to send him off adventuring, I dunno what would.

And once he gets started, he really has nowhere else to go to.

Al-Ed Lladnar- Hunter (Rogue 3 (Didn't pick combat style yet.) [See sig.]). Sadistic bully and thief. Obsessed (as in stalker-ish) with Darius's sister Neela. Murdered his little brother Anep because he wasn't being given enough attention. Twin brother of Atem. Apart from wanting to win Neela's heart (she's married) and move out of the desert, has no real goals to speak of.

(Bored of sociopaths, as I told the party when we started this. And apart from his Stalker With A Crush thing, has no real goals.)

Easy. Go, adventure, acheive fame. Surely she'll want you when you have fame. A slightly dysfunctional motivation? Sure. But it fits the character.

And yeah, move out of the desert? Bam. Another perfect motivation to go adventuring.

Atem Lladnar- Hunter (TWF Rogue 3 [See sig.]). Twin brother of Al-Ed. Only real backstory that isn't "followed his twin around" is his completely unexplained romance with some girl named Akasha. Wants to be leader of the tribe, apparently just 'cause.

(Probably the worst of the nomads despite having an actual goal. Just completely flat.)

Aright. First off, followed twin around is sufficient, if you have motivated his twin. Secondly, he has ambitions. Leadership doesn't just happen. This guy seems terribly easy to get adventurin'.

The Others:
Osama Jamal- Soldier (Archer Rogue 3 [See sig.]). Sniper and siege engineer for the Imperial Legions, began Walking The Earth after he came home from his first tour of duty to find his entire hometown burned to the ground. Apart from seeking revenge on the people who did this, has no real direction in life. Is gay, in case that is relevent beyond giving the appearance of depth.

(While he has plenty of potential plot hooks simply by being military, apart from enjoying his job he doesn't have much about him.)

I've seen this character a lot. Really, really easy to motivate so long as you have the revenge character to dangle. Once that's achieved, the player needs to come up with new goals. It's a turning point for the character.

Aranesp Peste- Criminal (Archer Rogue 3 [See sig.]). Spoiled brat, kicked out of his home to make a life for himself. After piddling around as a petty thief for a few years, decided he wanted to be emperor. Without anything remotely resembling success, he's since been trying to build up an organization to overthrow the government. Has a massive ego combined with severe issues with authority.

(Probably my favorite of the lot, I see him becoming the party's face. Suprising, considering the shiftless idiot he played in the last campaign. Has motivation and character depth, something that every other member of the party either has very little or none of at least one category.)

If any character will cause trouble, it will be this one. Sure, he's got plenty of angles to hook him on, but unless he happens to be party leader, playing his character results in party conflict.

[quote]Xumi Sanddancer- Hunter (Archer Rogue 3 [See sig.]). A wallflower. Seriously. Has been raised by a pleasant family, has had nothing exiting happen in her life, and has no goals beyond raising a family of her own.

(Worst in the party. No goals, no plot hooks in her backstory, and not even any real explaination of how she managed to gain military-level skills despite doing nothing but shoot deer.)

So have something happen. Some odd event that would result in her being tossed in with the rest of the misfits. Have her get blamed for (random bad thing) that happened to her tribe. Whatever.

So there's what I have to work with. While I can probably work most of these into a plot, my issue is that most of them almost seem to be actively avoiding having any sort of catalysts toward an interesting campaign. How do I get them to write characters that actually have some reason to go out and do something?

Well, so far, you've been all "horror, horror", right? Your players have learned an important lesson. Backstories are weapons to be used against you. Therefore, writing backstories is bad. It's a common theme in RPGing, and while it doesn't HAVE to be that way, lots of players have seen this enough to play it cautious.

Not to mention, some people just don't find enjoyment in filling out fifty question tests and writing backstories.

[Kami2awa]

Can you post this 51-question list?

[Tyndmyr]

If I was running a casual campaign I might consider doing this, since really the characters just exist as an excuse for Adventure!(TM). However, my campaigns are always extremely story-based; indeed this is probably the only reason I'm allowed to DM, considering my player-killing habits. So when my players fail to supply me with characters that have an actual motivation to go out and participate in the story, I'm left with nothing for them to do except maybe slaughtering all their loved ones and hope they vow revenge.

Er, if the story is the only reason they still let you DM, then don't work on the story more. It's probably good enough.

Work on the reasons you suspect they would like to make you stop DMing because of.

[FelixG]

Another thought occurs....

in your game I wouldn't try to come up with a remotely original in depth character either! You yourself admit you have a tendency to kill off your PCs. Why should I work on it when I am sure he is going to die off right away?

[dsmiles]

I'm sorry, but as one of the biggest advocates of RP-heavy games and RP-heavy characters, there is no way I'd want to answer 51 questions about a character.

Characters should have a bit of backstory, yeah. But it could be a 15-page epic, or a few ideas scribbled on a greasy napkin. That's all it should take. As long as the player has a good idea of the character's story and personality, that should be enough. If I want to use backgrounds as plot hooks, I'll ask the player casually (wouldn't do to give away the plot, after all), and not during a session, to expand on his/her character's background a little.

[Matamane]

You could have them roll on a random chart for this, and give them 2-3 sets of data. AEG mercenaries had a great system for that, and it was always fun to roll up an NPC that way. Appearance, demeanor, and flaws/traits. Have them build around that.

[dsmiles]

You could have them roll on a random chart for this, and give them 2-3 sets of data. AEG mercenaries had a great system for that, and it was always fun to roll up an NPC that way. Appearance, demeanor, and flaws/traits. Have them build around that.

To counter that:

Things like that should be the player's choice, not a set of random rolls. The player may not want to play a character with those traits. The game isn't only about what the DM wants, it's a cooperative storytelling wargame (yes, I put "cooperative storytelling" and "wargame" together).

[FelixG]

To counter that:

Things like that should be the player's choice, not a set of random rolls. The player may not want to play a character with those traits. The game isn't only about what the DM wants, it's a cooperative storytelling wargame (yes, I put "cooperative storytelling" and "wargame" together).

Thats is true, but if the Players dont want to bother coming up with all that on their own or a character thats going to get murdered by the GM a table to roll on for random traits would be nice.

[The Glyphstone]

To counter that:

Things like that should be the player's choice, not a set of random rolls. The player may not want to play a character with those traits. The game isn't only about what the DM wants, it's a cooperative storytelling wargame (yes, I put "cooperative storytelling" and "wargame" together).

You could take the Deathwatch (and, I presume, Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader) approach to that - charts of random quirks/backgrounds/histories that you can either choose from or roll randomly.

[dsmiles]

Thats is true, but if the Players dont want to bother coming up with all that on their own or a character thats going to get murdered by the GM a table to roll on for random traits would be nice.

Hell, If my character was going to get murdered every other session, I wouldn't even go that far.

[FelixG]

Hell, If my character was going to get murdered every other session, I wouldn't even go that far.

I wouldnt even play in the game but,hey, to each their own

[Khatoblepas]

If I was running a casual campaign I might consider doing this, since really the characters just exist as an excuse for Adventure!(TM). However, my campaigns are always extremely story-based; indeed this is probably the only reason I'm allowed to DM, considering my player-killing habits. So when my players fail to supply me with characters that have an actual motivation to go out and participate in the story, I'm left with nothing for them to do except maybe slaughtering all their loved ones and hope they vow revenge.

Have you tried just doing "Adventure!" ? Your players have failed to supply you with good characters for two reasons:

1) They aren't experienced in making complex characters
2) You kill them a lot.

Seriously, you kept killing their characters and they are probably tired of making complex characters whose motivations get subverted and an excuse to kill them. They make their characters as bland as possible as a defense mechanism, or they make bastards they don't care about.

Give them the benefit of the doubt. Tell them to make heroes, forget the 51 question test (Though I would like to read it.), forget the complex motivations and just have fun. Give them an overblown villain who is very evil and needs to be put down. Give them a world they can care about, not just "horrid place you wouldn't want to live in". Give them some hope.

Once you have your party of adventurers, they meet in a tavern, the old robed man in the corner gives them a quest, and they go and do it. Give them NPCs they can interact with, monsters that have a personality (but are still evil), and a simple, black and white morality that they can get behind. Those monsters are evil, go kill them. No, they aren't templated monstrosities. No, I won't kill you, the survival rate is very high today. No, I'm not sending monsters after you that you can't deal with. Yes, I'm doing XP by the book, so you can advance.

Don't worry about their huge backstories and weaving it into the "plot". Just let them explore and have fun. Then, when they've got a real connection with the world, then you lay the smackdown on what they know and love. Don't make it hopeless, just dramatic. Evil guy doin evil stuff? Well, we gotta save the village! We have a chance! Running is not an option this time! We can do it! We can save the people!

You bet your life they'll get a lot more engaged if they have a few victories under their belt. Their characters will be defined by their in game actions, not their backstories. So long as they have actions in game, they can develop their characters.

[Tyndmyr]

Hell, If my character was going to get murdered every other session, I wouldn't even go that far.

When I play games like that, you're lucky if I give my character a name.

[Siosilvar]

When I play games like that, you're lucky if I give my character a name.

Melf proves you can actually get surprisingly far that way.

[dsmiles]

Melf proves you can actually get surprisingly far that way.

So does Xagyg.

But seriously, nameless characters tend to die quickly (as proven over and over by my recent Gamma World 4e group, where the only character to survive the entire first session was the only one who had a name).

[Jarian]

But seriously, nameless characters tend to die quickly (as proven over and over by my recent Gamma World 4e group, where the only character to survive the entire first session was the only one who had a name).

To be fair, everything we've seen of Psycho's games means that even characters with backgrounds long enough to serve as plate mail if printed out on A4 die with remarkable rapidity.

[dsmiles]

To be fair, everything we've seen of Psycho's games means that even characters with backgrounds long enough to serve as plate mail if printed out on A4 die with remarkable rapidity.

Entirely different. It was pure chance that killed the Gamma World group, not an intent to murder characters.

[Vladislav]

And before you start complaining about how time consuming this must be, we managed to get six people to answer every question AND roll an entire character sheet (minus the equipment of two players) during a single session.

Interesting. When we started a new campaign, in the first session we managed to get everyone roll up an entire character sheet, with equipment and background, and get two hours of actual play in.

If you pride yourself at having almost but not quite finished making characters during the first session, methinks you're setting the bar too low.

[The Glyphstone]

Or they just have shorter sessions. I've played in 4-hour sessions, and all-day sessions, in different groups.

[Hyudra]

My own recommendation for making more rounded characters is to encourage it with the setting or a theme to the game. Since I started doing this, I've had a surplus of quality and interesting PCs.

For example, compare the following:

• Ok guys, we're going to be doing a dungeon crawl in the Tomb of Amotep. You'll start in a tavern in the City of Aos, so be sure to include details in your character background about how you arrived at Aos.
• Our campaign is taking place in Ramira. The King is dead, and there is no clear heir. You guys, the players, are members of the cutthroat noble class, a group of friends, cousins and allies conspiring to take the throne.

A player who knows it won't be a typical game isn't going to make as typical a character. I've run an orc-only game, a thieves guild game, a political game, etc, and I've had some outstanding characters throughout. I think (I hope) they feel that because the game premise has promise and involves their characters, they're more involved as a consequence.

But yeah, a dungeon crawl where my character is level 1 and is liable to die in the first session? As much as I love writing characters, you're not going to get more than a pretty perfunctory background from me.

I'm interested to see that questionnaire, though.

[Tyndmyr]

Possible. That said, I think half an hour is a reasonable amount of time for third level characters. Especially given they are all straight classed mundane chars.

[Oracle_Hunter]

However, my campaigns are always extremely story-based; indeed this is probably the only reason I'm allowed to DM, considering my player-killing habits.

This is pretty much all there is to know about this situation.

Trying to run a "story based" campaign in which characters are constantly killed off is not going to work; particularly if you want the "story" to be connected to the characters' personal motivations some how. It's like trying to write a novel and killing off the protagonist at the end of every chapter - plot lines have no time to be resolved and the character never gets a chance to develop. Nobody is going to put the effort into creating a well-rounded character when they expect to have him shredded within a week; the "kill their backstory" approach doesn't help matters either.

At this point you're never going to get a "good" backstory out of these Players - they're trained to your DMing style. If you want to try and fix this you're going to have to try a radically different approach.

Here's what I recommend:

Spoiler

Show

(1) Start over from scratch.
Yeah, it hurts but you need to cleanse the taste of the aborted campaign from the minds of your Players. You can shelve this story for another time.

(2) Introduce the idea of the "Wheel of Legends"
The "Wheel of Legends" is something I just made up - you can adapt it to your taste. The core concept is that each PC is a new incarnation of a Legendary Hero with a Destiny.

Spoiler

Show

During creation each Player needs to write up a description of the Legendary Hero which includes the following:
- The Legendary Name (what the Legendary Hero was named)
- 3 Legendary Signs (three things associated with the Legendary Hero)
- The Legendary Destiny (one particular task that the Legendary Hero is associated with)

As an example, let's take Robin Hood
Legendary Name: Robin Hood
Legendary Signs: (1) Peerless Archer, (2) Defender of the Downtrodden, (3) Bold Banditry
Legendary Destiny: To topple an unjust ruler who is oppressing his own people.

The PC, being a new incarnation of the Legendary Hero, should aspire to display the three Legendary Signs either in creation or through play. Note that they are not already Legendary Heroes, but their Hero's Destiny is also going to be their destiny.

Next, tell the Players that the "Wheel of Legends" spins out many potential Legends each cycles and when one potential version of a Legend dies without fulfilling his Destiny, the Wheel empowers another potential with Destiny. So if their current PC is killed (and does not get rezzed) their next character will also fit the archetype of their original Legend even if his backstory is different.

The point of the "Wheel of Legends" is to give the Players a guarantee of stability in their motivations without reducing the risk of death & failure. No matter how many times they lose a PC they can be assured that they can continue fighting for the ultimate Destiny that they themselves have chosen. This incentivizes them to think about the Destiny they want to be moving towards rather than waiting for the DM to tell them what to do.

(3) Look at the Destinies your Players provide, and construct a world/campaign where each of them can be fulfilled over the course of play.
The Destinies give you, as the DM, a handy hook to use to pull characters into the story. Note that no one Destiny need (or should) be the ultimate goal of a campaign - but they should all build towards whatever ultimate goal you have in mind. If you want the Players to stop a Mad God from destroying the world, make sure that along the way Robin Hood has to topple a tyrant (a servant of the God, perhaps), Perseus gets to slay a fearsome monster, and Miyamoto Musashi is able to prove that he is the world's ultimate swordsman.

(4) Before the game (and after character creation) ask each Player to answer a short questionnaire (no more than 10 questions) about their PC.
The point of this questionnaire needs to be establishing the PCs as living beings within the world - not to give you something to yank the PCs around with. You're unlikely to get better responses than you've received so far, but don't worry about it.

A sample questionnaire:

Spoiler

Show

(1) What is your character's name?
(2) Where were you born? How do you feel about being born there?
(3) Are your parents alive? What about brothers and sisters? How are your relations with them?
(4) Why are you adventuring? What are you trying to find?
(5) Is there anything you should be doing, or duties you've abandoned, in order to adventure? What would convince you to stop adventuring?
(6) Name three people your character could ask for favors or advice, and why they'd help you.
(7) Name two enemies you've made, and why they dislike you.
(8) Name two things your character would like to accomplish, in the short-to-medium term.
(9) Name two things you, as a player, would like for your character, in the short-to-medium term.

(5) During play take note of people/places that the Players show interest in. Spend time developing those people/places and allow the PCs as much time as they want to interact with them.
This step is how you get well-rounded characters. People respond more authentically to situations they have experienced rather than ones they claim to have experienced. Through interaction with their environment, Players get a better sense of their characters and their characters' character.

I'd like to hear what the OP thinks of this advice. I know it's dramatic, but you can't just force people to play a certain way - particularly when you've taught them (accidentally or not) to play a different way.