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

[Amnestic]

Here's the issue, as I see it:

-She is currently living a peaceful life.
-Her goal is to live a peaceful life.

See how there's no motivation for her to change the status quo?

So...why not just stop her living a peaceful life? Kill her family, burn down her village, blow something up, drop a steamroller on someone. Then her motivation is to return to her peaceful life. All she wants to do is settle down, but her need to fight against [Enemy of the Day] is preventing her from doing so. She becomes a...well, a reluctant hero I suppose. Motivation+Opportunity for character development.

[dsmiles]

"I would like to have a family of my own/peaceful life." - Xumi Sanddancer

"Visit every country." - Darius Vajheer

"Become emperor." - Aranesp Peste

"To be the leader of the tribe." - Atem Lladnar

"Revenge on the guys who burned down his town. After that, one thing at a time." - Osama Jamal

"To win Neela over and then get out of the desert and into the city." - Al-Ed Lladnar

Thank you players for me, they just wrote my next series of adventures.

[Drakevarg]

So...why not just stop her living a peaceful life? Kill her family, burn down her village, blow something up, drop a steamroller on someone. Then her motivation is to return to her peaceful life. All she wants to do is settle down, but her need to fight against [Enemy of the Day] is preventing her from doing so. She becomes a...well, a reluctant hero I suppose. Motivation+Opportunity for character development.

Again, I don't see what an abrupt removal from a peaceful life can do to keep someone whose primary motivation in life is to just be at peace to simply move to a different town and go back to their routine.

I could simply keep blowing **** up again and again, but that would just make it seem like the universe gets off on ****ting on her. Plus, it defeats the whole point of "come up with some actual motivation to adventure so I don't need to resort to destroying everything you know and love until you cooperate."

[Doc Roc]

2 problems with that:

1) My setting is extremely specific and doesn't have room for the magical hijinks of 99.9% of prewritten adventures.

I think it's time for a break. You should try a lighter weight system, or something like Legend where death is.... less of a permanent event. If things aren't working, you should always first consider the possibility that the problem or at least the onus of a solution lies with you.

Failure to do so speaks deeply and ill of your chances of having fun as a GM.

Thank you players for me, they just wrote my next series of adventures.

Holy crap, I missed that. Thank them for me too!

[Amnestic]

Again, I don't see what an abrupt removal from a peaceful life can do to keep someone whose primary motivation in life is to just be at peace to simply move to a different town and go back to their routine.

I could simply keep blowing **** up again and again, but that would just make it seem like the universe gets off on ****ting on her. Plus, it defeats the whole point of "come up with some actual motivation to adventure so I don't need to resort to destroying everything you know and love until you cooperate."

You don't think "revenge" is suitable motivation? It might just be the player in me, but if some guy burned down my house, killed my family and dropped a steamroller on my dog, I'd probably head out to make sure he didn't do it to anyone else/to me again.

[erikun]

The only enemy Darius has is Al-Ed (which is problematic in-and-of itself).

Darius doesn't have any other enemies written in his backstory. This doesn't mean he doesn't have any other enemies. Perhaps it's someone who bullied him as a kid, and got resentful as he grew stronger. Perhaps it's family of the dead hunters, who found it highly suspicious that only Darius returned. Perhaps some wizard really was scrying around for the easiest targets to blackmail (although your comment of no wizards makes this unlikely).

Perhaps it's just some merchant who wants to hire compotent people to search a ruins, and Darius is the only sucker who showed up in response. He is rather noteworthy in his tribe, after all, and traders would have word about him.

I thought of this, but why would they wait over a decade before returning?

Perhaps they were nearly dead, and recovered in the next town. Perhaps they were training. Perhaps they were building contacts to come back. If Darius is the strongest and best-respected person of his age in the tribe, then who is going to believe the third-son of a known liar and coward who said it was Darius's fault?

There aren't any wizards in this setting; it's EXTREMELY low-magic.

Fair enough, although no magic at all would explain a lot of the unintentional deaths.

Unlikely, since she left before the start of the campaign, something Atem's player has so far failed to elaborate upon.

Get him to elaborate, or tell the player you will have to make something up. He's not going to marry her if she isn't there, after all.

Why would that happen? She's living a quiet life as a hunter.

I thought she was living with her parents as a farmer? Either way, there are dozens of ways to get her out of the forest. The game could have dried up. Her parents could need more money. Her home could have been set on fire. Local orcs could be trying to eat her. Or she could just come into the city for buying standard goods, and your friendly neighborhood merchant (Nessa) could direct her to the same place she directed Al-Ed.

I can't just tell them they're curious. And Nessa wouldn't want anything to do with the creeps.

You don't need to. If they're not curious, then Nessa is but can't leave the stall to see this fancy meeting that the tribes are talking about. Won't the nice and considerate Al-Ed and his loyal brother take the time to check it out for her?

Osama's not the mercenary type, though Aranesp might be willing to work for someone if they would help in his "take over the country" goals.

Osama is a career soldier, and he has to make money somehow. There is unlikely to be much work unless there is an active war, so a position of pay to a trained fighter and guard (our meeting) wouldn't be a bad idea, especially when you point out that he hasn't found employment over the last few months and his money is running low. (First level characters are rarely rich.)

If Aranesp is going to be a problem, just ask what motivation would get him into the group. For that matter, ask everyone that. They won't come to a meeting that promises them money and employment? See what else they're interested in.

If anyone decides that they don't want to do it, go ahead and give them a blank character sheet to work on. After all, the story is on the adventuring party that goes to the ruins and explores, not the NPCs that stay behind and remain unemployed.

[Doc Roc]

You don't think "revenge" is suitable motivation? It might just be the player in me, but if some guy burned down my house, killed my family and dropped a steamroller on my dog, I'd probably head out to make sure he didn't do it to anyone else/to me again.

Or I'd snap, and become an absolute monster. Also a great plot hook.

[Drakevarg]

I think it's time for a break. You should try a lighter weight system, or something like Legend where death is.... less of a permanent event. If things aren't working, you should always first consider the possibility that the problem or at least the onus of a solution lies with you.

Failure to do so speaks deeply and ill of your chances of having fun as a GM.

So you want me to abandon my settings, aka pretty much the only reason I bother DMing as opposed to playing in the first place?

[dsmiles]

Or I'd snap, and become an absolute monster. Also a great plot hook.

Indeed. (Now with 10 characters or more.)

[Doc Roc]

So you want me to abandon my settings, aka pretty much the only reason I bother DMing as opposed to playing in the first place?

:: thoughtful look ::
Yes.




Not indefinitely, but for a couple sessions, while you work this out. Part of the issue is the degree of urgency, I suspect. Talking it over with them, over other games, in other settings, or even just away from the table, is going to help more. You have to meet in the middle on this, and right now, it seems that they don't even realize how far from the middle they are, in your eyes. Understand that I'm speaking from some pretty extensive experience, here, and I definitely feel your pain. I just don't think it merits a crisis of any flavor.

[Ossian]

Gotta love this thread! At long last, not a debate about sword and board, desertwinders, and Earth Scorching kobolds! Can you post or PM me the questionnaire? I would love toread it and possibly use it for my PCs.

BEst,

Ossian

[Drakevarg]

You don't think "revenge" is suitable motivation? It might just be the player in me, but if some guy burned down my house, killed my family and dropped a steamroller on my dog, I'd probably head out to make sure he didn't do it to anyone else/to me again.

Not for someone who's IRL personality and usual characters are almost obsessed with not calling attention to themselves. In the last campaign she played almost exactly the same character, and when EVERYONE IN HER VILLAGE WAS BURNED ALIVE she just kinda pouted a little and then moved on with her life.

[erikun]

Gotta love this thread! At long last, not a debate about sword and board, desertwinders, and Earth Scorching kobolds! Can you post or PM me the questionnaire? I would love toread it and possibly use it for my PCs.

BEst,

Ossian

Here you go, from the last page:

Spoiler

Show

1. What is your name?

2. Any nicknames?

3. Preferred name?

4. What is your race?

5. Boy or girl?

6. Hair color and style?

7. What is your build?

8. Your weight?

9. When is your birthday?

10. How old are you?

11. What time period are you from?

12. Where is your home?

13. Is that where you were born? If not, where were you born?

14. What is your alignment?

15. Weapon of choice?

16. Element of choice?

17. Any family?

18. What is your family like?

19. What is your deepest darkest secret?

20. What is a well known "secret" about you?

21. What has your past been like?

22. Any romantic interests?

23. Anyone interested in you that you know of?

24. What is your favorite color?

25. What is your favorite food?

26. What is your favorite movie/play?

27. What is/was your favorite subject in school?

28. What is your favorite sport to watch/play?

29. What do you do for a living?

30. What languages do you speak?

31. Who are your friends?

32. And your foes?

33. How tall are you?

34. Are you a virgin?

35. Anything unusual about you?

36. Have you ever killed or seriously hurt anyone?

37. How do you relax after a long day?

38. What do you tend to do on a normal day?

39. Any irrational fears?

40. Regular fears or weaknesses?

41. Any bad habits?

42. If you could go back into your past and correct one mistake, would you? If so, what mistake? If not, why?

43. Are you ticklish?

44. How do you keep in contact with people?

45. What is your diet?

46. Have you ever broken the law?

47. What plans do you have for the future?

48. Any skills that can be put to good use?

49. What is your temperment like?

50. What is the happiest moment of your life?

51. Turn that around, what is your worst moment?

52. Any other habits?

53. What is your quote or catch phrase?

I didn't come up with this myself, mind. A friend of mine from school gave it to me.

[Doc Roc]

Not for someone who's IRL personality and usual characters are almost obsessed with not calling attention to themselves. In the last campaign she played almost exactly the same character, and when EVERYONE IN HER VILLAGE WAS BURNED ALIVE she just kinda pouted a little and then moved on with her life.

Then everyone else gets a motivation, and she's dragged along to glory. This is how innumerable heroes are made.

[Fallbot]

I need a goal to fit two criteria:
- They need to have a reason to travel.
- They need to have a goal to accomplish.

Next time just ask them for that. The other questions are distracting, and answering them will just bog them down.

As lots of people are pointing out in the How To Make a Well Rounded Character thread that's just started up, most people only make a basic background to start off, and then let a character develop organically. I have characters I could easily answer all your questions for, but they're characters I've been playing for months, and have got to know. Making a new character right of the bat, I'd find answering them all difficult, intimidating and extremely tedious. You really don't need to know a character's favourite colour, or how she lost her virginity (???) in the back of her father's wagon to have the makings of a good character.

[Drakevarg]

Darius doesn't have any other enemies written in his backstory. This doesn't mean he doesn't have any other enemies. Perhaps it's someone who bullied him as a kid, and got resentful as he grew stronger. Perhaps it's family of the dead hunters, who found it highly suspicious that only Darius returned. Perhaps some wizard really was scrying around for the easiest targets to blackmail (although your comment of no wizards makes this unlikely).

True, but the backstory rather specifically asked for this criteria. And what's the point of letting them write their own backstory if I was just going to rewrite it whenever I felt like it?

Perhaps it's just some merchant who wants to hire compotent people to search a ruins, and Darius is the only sucker who showed up in response. He is rather noteworthy in his tribe, after all, and traders would have word about him.

Valid if the threat was vague enough.

Perhaps they were nearly dead, and recovered in the next town. Perhaps they were training. Perhaps they were building contacts to come back. If Darius is the strongest and best-respected person of his age in the tribe, then who is going to believe the third-son of a known liar and coward who said it was Darius's fault?

Well he was hardly well-respected at the time of the incident. He was only 13-ish and was just recovering from an illness that plagued him for most of his childhood.

Get him to elaborate, or tell the player you will have to make something up. He's not going to marry her if she isn't there, after all.

I've asked him to elaborate. He's yet to respond.

I thought she was living with her parents as a farmer? Either way, there are dozens of ways to get her out of the forest. The game could have dried up. Her parents could need more money. Her home could have been set on fire. Local orcs could be trying to eat her. Or she could just come into the city for buying standard goods, and your friendly neighborhood merchant (Nessa) could direct her to the same place she directed Al-Ed.

Game drying up/fire basically just translates to "move somewhere else."
Orcs don't exist in this setting. In fact, only humans do.
Need money more likely means "sell furs" not "become a mercenary."
Can't think of any reason for her to follow the merchant's direction. Like I said, the player seems determinedly nonconfrontational.

You don't need to. If they're not curious, then Nessa is but can't leave the stall to see this fancy meeting that the tribes are talking about. Won't the nice and considerate Al-Ed and his loyal brother take the time to check it out for her?

Potentially valid.

Osama is a career soldier, and he has to make money somehow. There is unlikely to be much work unless there is an active war, so a position of pay to a trained fighter and guard (our meeting) wouldn't be a bad idea, especially when you point out that he hasn't found employment over the last few months and his money is running low. (First level characters are rarely rich.)

The empire has been at war for most of recorded history. Which does mean he has plenty of potential work, but the problem is getting him to travel with the other PCs.

If Aranesp is going to be a problem, just ask what motivation would get him into the group. For that matter, ask everyone that. They won't come to a meeting that promises them money and employment? See what else they're interested in.

I've decided to, next weekend, have them all rewrite their backstories so they all know at least two of the other PCs and have a specific reason to travel.

[erikun]

True, but the backstory rather specifically asked for this criteria. And what's the point of letting them write their own backstory if I was just going to rewrite it whenever I felt like it?

Does nothing in your world exist beyond the one tribe and Xumi's farm, because nothing beyond that was discussed in the backstories? There are millions of characters alive in your world, depending on technology. It would seem very, very strange that not a single one would have any interaction with any of the characters beforehand.

You are the DM. If you need a character link that the player isn't aware of, then make it. The player doesn't need to know that, say, the baron actually hates his tribe and hopes he dies in some ruin (hence funding the expedition). But creating such a character wouldn't be rewriting the character's backstory either. It would be writing a past that the character was, understandably, not aware of.

Game drying up/fire basically just translates to "move somewhere else."
Need money more likely means "sell furs" not "become a mercenary."
Can't think of any reason for her to follow the merchant's direction. Like I said, the player seems determinedly nonconfrontational.

I'm not too sure about those. How convienent would it be for mom and dad to just leave their farm and live as paupers? How convienent would it be for her, especially if she isn't familiar with geography outside her forest? This isn't 2010. You can't look up a job interview on the internet before making a move. You can't even buy a map to see what other green forests are nearby. What is she planning on doing, walking east until she finds another forest or falls into the ocean?

And, of course, there is always the option of saying "okay". She doesn't go to the meeting, she doesn't see the other party members, and she keeps walking east. That's a player decision, and there is not reason for the character not to do so. That doesn't mean we'll see her again as a PC, though. (I find it odd that you're free to berade and injure and kill characters for not fitting to your ideal, but having them walk away is somehow incorrect.)

[Mystic Muse]

Critique of the list of questions.

Spoiler

Show

1. your players should be telling you this already.

2. Valid I guess, although I'd probably just put "no"

3. Makes 1 and 2 irrelevant.

4. If there's only humans in this setting, this question seems irrelevant. If you meant as in skin color, still seems irrelevant.

5. Players should be telling you this already.

6-8. Yeah, these are valid questions.

9. Doesn't seem Necessary unless you expect it to come up.

10. Valid question.

11. I thought this was an extremely low magic game. Why would they be from a different time period than anybody else?

12 and 13. Valid questions.

14. Players should be telling you this already.

15. Doesn't seem Necessary. Their weapon of choice is most likely whatever they're currently wielding.

16. Why do you need to know this again?

17 and 18 should be combined into one and say "Do you have any family, and if so what are they like?

19. Valid

20. I'm kind of in the middle on this one.

21. Valid.

22 and 23 are valid but should be combined.

24-28. Are these really going to ever come up?

29. Valid.

30. This should be on their character sheet.

31 and 32 are valid but should be combined since it looks like they were intended to be anyway.

33. Valid

34. I can't see this coming up either.

35 and 36. Valid.

37 and 38. I don't see this coming up very often.

39-42. Valid

43. Why does this even need to be asked?

44. Valid.

45. Not going to come up.

46-52. valid

53. I don't see the point of this one.

If you get rid of the number of questions I don't think will ever come up, and combine the two I mention you've reduced the list from 53 questions to 30. Something to think about anyway.

[FelixG]

I don't kill them to get them to do what I want. I either kill them because a) they did something stupid and got themselves killed, b) I miscalculate the difficulty and they get smooshed or c) I was considering killing them off and outright telling them to write more motivated characters.

This made me lol

You dont kill them to get them to do what you want...yet you say you kill them because their characters aren't motivated enough for you...

My recommendation be that you stop GMing and encourage one of the others to GM for a while so you can play instead. Maybe get some fresh ideas flowing and take a break from the setting you have developed.

I know if I played the same thing over, and over, it would get very bland very quick...and killing multiple players every 4 sessions is something that needs to be worked on, again they have NO reason to put work into an exciting character if its just going to get murdered because A) you screw up the CR B) they make a mistake C) you just plain dont like em.

Also the reason you may be screwing the encounter difficulty up and killing your PCs might be because DnD assumes you are going to have magic available to you in one form or another.

[icefractal]

Man, after seeing the responses here, I can see why the "Mercenary Orphan" character type is popular with some players. I mean, there's a character who actually does have a family and village, and half the responses are something like "burn it down and kill everyone". In fact, quite a few of the responses for any of the characters is "make everything suck", and the OP mentions that he kills off a lot of characters and generally makes the (game) world a horrible place.

Even for players who like that kind of thing, they can get fatigued if it's always the case, and it sounds like the previous campaign was the same way. I'm hardly surprised that player #2's character is kind of a **** - why would you want to subject a nice character to a world like that?

I mean, yes, conflict drives the story. But, you have to use some moderation. If every relation just exists to be murdered, every goal to be thwarted, and every connection to cause woe, before an untimely death - then players tend not to have much connection to the characters, or interest in a deep backstory. "Let's see how long we can survive this meatgrinder" is a valid and sometimes fun campaign style, but it's not usually one where the characters have a backstory - or even always a name.

[NMBLNG]

An idea:

The tribe gets invaded, Roman style. All members of the tribe are taken as slaves, and they are scattered across the region.

The players should have an immediate motivation to un-become slaves and escape their captors. Being on the run an keep things interesting as well.

After escaping, ask the players what their characters want to do. Then watch them try to do it. For some, make it a bit easier (taking over the world). Others, make it harder (living in peace).

[BRC]

Here's the thing, you can't force a well-rounded character out of somebody who isn't excited about one. No matter how many questions you make them answer, if they arn't interested in their character, they won't explore the character.

First of all, most of the questions on that questionaire are pointless or irrelevant. They may load the character down with superficial details without giving them any actual depth.
I would limit it to these Three Questions (Stuff like Gender, Age, Name, Race, ect are all already part of character creation).

1: Where did your character come from, this should include an explanation for how they picked up the skills they started the campaign with. If they are a wizard, this question should include how they started to study magic, if they are a sorcerer, it should include how the discovered their power, if a fighter it should include who trained them, if a cleric, why are they devoted to that particular god, ect.
2: Why are they adventuring, most importantly, why are they adventuring with this group instead of doing any number of other things. This can link in with the previous question, and in fact it should. If an evil duke executed their parents, they are adventuring in hopes of one day being able to get revenge. Built into this is "What are their goals for the future".
3: What are their preferred methods for solving problems. Do they like to take things head on, do they like to trick or out think their enemies. Included in this should be the question "What lines will they not cross?". What are they willing to do to achieve their goals.




However, making them fill out forms won't get you a motivated character. Sit down with them and work out answers to these three questions, don't hand them a piece of paper then reject or approve it, work with them. Start with their basic ideas (My Parents were killed by an evil Duke) and build on that, ask them Why the Duke killed their parents (My Parents were trying to organize the local farmers against the Duke), maybe come up with some ideas on your own that you don't tell the player (The Parents were secretly part of an ancient order protecting an artifact the Duke wanted.) The important thing is that the Player walks away excited about playing their character.

Also, the personality of the Character is more important than their backstory. A Fighter whose backstory is "I was in the army, I finished my service and left, now I'm an adventurer" can work great of the Player has a fun personality for the character and is willing to act on that. One of my favorite characters (Honest Giovanni) had basically no backstory. He was a Con Man, a liar, and an unrepentant scoundrel (Of the "Sell a fake gold amulet and claim it's magic" variety, not the "Kill you in your sleep and steal your stuff" variety), and he was fun.

In short, don't declare they need a well rounded character and keep killing them until they make one that meets your standards. Work with them until they produce a character they are excited about role-playing as. If they only come up with a character in order to appease you, they will not be invested in it. The purpose should be for the player to Understand their characters, not to provide you with ready made plot hooks.

[Saint Nil]

I agree with the idea that the survey needs a large overhaul. Your favorite weapon is less important than why it might be your favorite.

Try this instead. If forces them to create other characters they can interact with, as well goals and secrets about the characters (some of the good aspects of the survey your friend gave you.)

The second biggest problem is that you seem to have made a world and refuse to change it at all, even if it means your players won't have fun. Admittly, DMing if a huge task. World building is the best part. But which is better-an empty world that runs like you want it to, or a living world that is forced to adapt to your players. Watch the video series "The Gamers 2: Dorkness Rising". That DM had some similar problems. Hopefully this will help, as well as the other great advice that has already been posted here.

[Pisha]

Try this. Don't ask them "what are your motivations/goals." Maybe they don't have any decent motivations or goals, or don't know what they are yet. The simpler question, and the one that's more useful to you, is "Why are you adventuring?"

After all, that's more to the point, isn't it? Your players are supposed to be making adventurers. So the one chick wants to live a quiet happy peaceful life. That's great for her. Most people want that. So then: why is she adventuring??? What is preventing her from living that peaceful life, and how is adventuring going to solve that problem?

They don't even have to be fantastic reasons. They could be as simple as "I want money." "I want fame." "I really like killing things." "If I spend one more day in this gods-forsaken desert, I'm going to go stir-crazy." Whatever. But they need at least one reason for their characters to get off their butts and out the door, and both they and you need to know what that reason is.

And if they can't give you any good reason for their characters to go adventuring, then they need to put those characters on the shelf and come up with ones that will. Otherwise it becomes a game of "everyone else does something fun, and Bob the Fighter sits at home alone."

And the rest of it can honestly wait. For example, I've been playing a character for about 2 years now in a VERY story-related game. This is a very well-rounded, well-developed character; she's had character arcs and personal revelations and complicated motivations, the works. She's actually one of my favorite characters I've ever played.

Know what her original background was? "Um... she's a thief... she doesn't trust anyone... she's really greedy and, uh... she doesn't like the government or the church. Cuz they're lawful and she's chaotic." She got better.

Good characters need time to grow naturally. It's ok to not know a lot about your character when the game begins; if you just play them, their personality will start to shine through, and the players will "discover" (i.e. figure out) more of their background. (Also, this might be a way to compromise on the style of game you run. As you said, you prefer a more in-depth adventure rather than a monster-of-the-week, but obviously your players are having trouble making in-depth characters right off the bat. If you start off with a more general, basic-adventure game, that gives you and your players time to get to know their characters better, making it easier to move into a more personalized story. Just a thought.)

One thing you might want to try, instead of a lengthy questionnaire, is the Ten Minute Background. Don't have them fill it out at first, unless they're just really inspired - give it to them to think about during the first few sessions. Maybe let them know you'd like them to fill it out after the first 2 months or so - they may not have all of it by then, but they should have some. You'll get better backgrounds cuz they have more time to think about it and don't feel pressured (and because the questions tend to inspire more thought), and the answers will probably be more useful to you. (I'll be honest. Everyone who knows me knows I'm an extremely in-depth roleplayer. To this day, I don't know the favorite color of a single one of my many characters. Nor has it ever once been relevant in a game.)

Another thing to try is periodically asking them what they'd like to see or what they'd like to happen to their character. (They, the player, not the character himself.) Simple examples might be "I think I'd rather be Chaotic Good instead of Chaotic Neutral, but my character doesn't have a reason to change - can we work something out?" or "I'm thinking of multiclassing. Can something happen to introduce us to some druids?" More complex examples are "I'd really like to get involved in some intrigue. Could we discover a revolutionary cell plotting to overthrow the Duke?" or "Hey, you remember that guy I accidentally killed in backstory? I wanna play with that; could his brother somehow find out I was responsible?" It'll be slow going at first, but if you take their suggestions seriously (even the silly ones), they'll begin to be more invested in the process - and therefore in their characters.

2 more things, and then I swear I'm done!

1) You're sounding pretty defensive about not changing your GM style, and I don't think you need to be. Of course you have the right to run the game your way. It's your game! And no one's saying for a second that you should run a game if you don't enjoy it. However. From what you're describing, you're getting pretty frustrated with the game. So... just consider the idea that if you bend just a little to meet your players halfway, you might actually have a better chance to play the game you want to play, with your players fully participating, than if you dig in your heels and just wait for them to change.

2) As a fairly new GM who likes story much more than mechanics, I completely understand misjudging a combat. Sometimes an encounter I spent 2 hours planning turns out to be lethally overpowered - or laughably underpowered. Know what I do?? Fudge it. Seriously, in a purely hack-and-slash game, yeah, let the dice fall where they may. In a story-based game like yours, though? Death shouldn't happen unless there's a reason. You're the GM; if you don't want to kill a character, don't. Unless the character has done something unspeakably stupid or it's a major dramatic fight, it is 100% ok to change stats on the fly or fudge a dice roll. (Just don't ever, ever let your players know you're doing it.) That might help with character longevity, which might ALSO lead to better characters.

[DougTheHead]

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?

Really? You're having a problem coming up with a way to yoke these characters together on an adventure? I understand that you're a reluctant GM and very dedicated to playing a particular setting, but how the hell is this possibly a problem? Flat characters are, if anything, easier to fit into storylines. I have a feeling this is more a case of the players not fitting into the predetermined stories you wanted to put them through than any actual problems with getting them to move on. But in case you're genuinely asking "how do I make a halfway-plausible story out of these characters?" rather than "how do I get my players to squeeze into the preset roles I've passive-aggressively refused to let them know I'm interested in dealing with," then here's a quick-and-dirty idea.
QUICK AND DIRTY QUEST SOLUTION

1. A Lieutenant from the group that burned down Osama Jamal's village (possibly somebody from that village who he did not realize was a traitor) emerges from the desert with your campaign world's equivalent of Tusken Raiders- nomadic cannibal tribes that, with the aid of some mysterious power/technology/weaponry, destroy the camp and imprison a large portion of the population, including Neela. Osama and Al-Ed now have sufficient reason to go.

2. Atem and Aranesp go for reasons of ambition (as well as possible twin-loyalty)- Atem realizes that by saving a large number of his people from a grisly fate (cribbing from The Road, let's say the cannibal desert raiders keep their prisoners alive as long as possible, amputating limbs and removing unnecessary organs for small meals in order to lengthen the amount of time their meat stays fresh), he stands a good chance of being trusted with tribal leadership when the adventure is over.

Aranesp, for his part, is interested in the mysterious power/weapon/technology (referred to hereafter as the MacGuffin) that allowed the usually desperate raiders to so easily destroy their settlement. His background would naturally give him a smaller view of the world than your average Emperor-wannabe, and he would think that the power the MacGuffin holds might be sufficient to help him gain control of the campaign world. Please note that this could provide future tension between the two, as Atem taking responsibility for the lives of his villagers makes him more carefully consider the true responsibilities of power, while Aranesp's single-minded pursuit of the MacGuffin is likely to make him more focused on the benefits.

3. Darius you could go one of two ways- either the MacGuffin is related to the powers of the spirit monster he released (and therefore must! be! destroyed! if you want more conflict with Aranesp), and/or he feels that
saving these villagers will ease the guilt he feels over causing the deaths of those other villagers in the past. Either way, it's a classic attempt at personal redemption that can take on tragic tones as he realizes that the virtue of his present actions can never truly erase the error of his past ones.

4. Xumi Sanddancer has more possible options than the others, mostly by virtue of being completely flat, and several of those possibilities have already been mentioned. Some others: she really wants to start a family, but maybe there's one guy she really wants to start a family with in particular. My understanding of human interaction is that that is mainly how these things work. So maybe the guy gets carried off too, and she decides that she wants to rescue him. Or maybe her family gets captured (and one or two of them get eaten to some degree before the rescue party can catch up). It's obvious, but I did say this was quick and dirty.

But maybe that's repetitious. So instead have The Guy be the lookout on duty at the time the settlement was attacked. She was flirting with him, he missed the early signs of a raiding party, and post-raid, the town suspects her of being a double agent and selling out her tribe. You can use the "wallflower" status to back this up: have NPCs say "she always was trying to blend into the background- almost as if she was hoping we'd forget she was there." If you're afraid of her moving to a different settlement (assuming that's something commonly done in your campaign setting, leaving alone the fact that people in tribal or nomadic societies tend to stay with the same group of people all their lives), then bring in Neela's husband.

Say he loves Neela deeply, with her death feels as though he has lost everything, and even though he may not believe Xumi is a double agent, he knows she is the agent of his unhappiness, and is willing to devote his life to hounding her from settlement to settlement, blackening her name to all that will hear and generally trying to make her as tormented for her entire life as he feels at this moment. The only way she'll ever get him off her back is if Neela is returned- and the easiest way to make sure that happens is to go with the group, especially since that means that Neela's husband- the best fighter and hunter the tribe has, which explains his ability to win her as a wife- will be coming along too. This gives you several inter-party story hooks- the husband's status makes him a threat to both twins (for different reasons), a bogeyman to Xumi, and gives you the most powerful character in the party, to help or hinder the rest of his teammates as you wish. It's a great way to help your players out if you underestimate the difficulty of an encounter by giving you an occasional deus ex machina who can help out until the characters level up sufficiently, at which point you can keep him around to motivate Xumi, or have him get in a fight with the rest of the party and die- at the beginning he'll be powerful enough to kick everybody's ass.

So that's just what I came up with off the top of my head, and given what you've written about the world and characters so far, it doesn't seem particularly implausible as a story hook. Of course, a 51-question survey gives you a lot of excuses, but if your survey is limiting your options rather than expanding them, you should discard it, never mind how much time everyone spent filling it out.

ALTERNATE SOLUTION: Of course, if you want to go to as little trouble as possible, try running a campaign that resembles the SimCity games. Your players' characters don't want to leave the settlement? Fine. Give them administration positions within the tribe and make them carry them out, rolls and all. Have the political twin try to gladhand his way to chief while his brother tries to sleep with Neela- but also get her husband's vote on a vital spear-sharpening regulation he wants to get passed! Keep doing this until your players notice, and if they complain, point out that this is probably what most of their characters would be doing. They'll either tell you what they want to be doing, or get their own characters the hell out of Dodge instead.

[Tyndmyr]

So you want me to abandon my settings, aka pretty much the only reason I bother DMing as opposed to playing in the first place?

No, I'm guessing the reason you bother DMing is because nobody else wants to.

See, settings, no matter how good, need to be changed up if you want to be a good DM. I would even say that to be a great DM, you have to play multiple systems. That diversity of experience will give you insights you likely never would have gotten otherwise.

And, tbh, nobody else will ever care about your setting as much as you do. This is the harsh reality of life as a setting designer or author. You have to accept that and work with it if you want to be good at either one.

[Cartigan]

So you want me to abandon my settings, aka pretty much the only reason I bother DMing as opposed to playing in the first place?

Given that, I'd suggest that you abandon DMing. The way you put that implies that you are only DMing so as to foist your universe on other people as some sort of odd immersion method for writing feedback. Or perhaps you are just terrible at writing characters and are trying to nudge other people to create interesting people in your universe for you. Either way, it sounds like the last reason you are DMing is because you want to.

[Vladislav]

I don't kill them to get them to do what I want. I either kill them because a) they did something stupid and got themselves killed, b) I miscalculate the difficulty and they get smooshed or c) I was considering killing them off and outright telling them to write more motivated characters.

If there ever was such thing as a DMing license, Psycho should have had his revoked right about now. Edit: maybe too harsh, but at least suspended.

[Doc Roc]

And, tbh, nobody else will ever care about your setting as much as you do. This is the harsh reality of life as a setting designer or author. You have to accept that and work with it if you want to be good at either one.

Not a perfect absolute. I, for example, steadfastly refuse to dote on my settings even a little. So by dint of my seething disdain for my own work, players have cared more....... That's sort of a corner case, though.

[dsmiles]

Not a perfect absolute. I, for example, steadfastly refuse to dote on my settings even a little. So by dint of my seething disdain for my own work, players have cared more....... That's sort of a corner case, though.

Yeah, I'd say that that's not the mean of the bell curve on that one. Players rarely give two craps about the setting that they play in. There are a special golden few that put all their effort into helping you develop your setting. I have one in my current group, and he's a very close friend of mine to begin with, so it's a natural response that we help develop each others' settings.