Playing D&D: Homebrew or Published Setting? Why?

[Ratskinner]

As a GM, always been Homebrew. Occasionally used published bits and pieces. As a player: most of the time homebrew, but heavier than I usually do on the published bits. (Like whole adventures stitched into the world.)

As a GM, making it up is one of the big pleasures, why skip it?

 

[PMárk]

While I get the appeal of making my own world, I am and always was attracted to specific rpgs by their settings and frequently by novels I red and liked.

To be interested in a game, I need an interesting setting and for an interesting setting I'd like to read good stories, to get into the headspace. I'm just more story-focused, than DIY-focused.

No wonder I always preferred games with detailed settings and I never minded metaplot, actually on the contrary. So, yes, WoD, Shadowrun, FR, Golarion, Ravenloft all the way, for me, usually.

 

[Azzy]

Traditionally, I've almost always homebrewed as a DM, and played in homebrewed settings as well. Recently, I DMed and am now playing in Greyhawk. The next time I run a D&D game, I'll probably homebrew it, though.

I never did put the why in that last post.

When I was playing in the early days of my RPG "career", it never really occurred to me or the rest of my group to use an established setting until a bit later. Then we tried the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance—then we went back to homebrew setting.

The recent use of Greyhawk, I think is mostly been used as a familiar foothold while we were (and are) exploring 5e. Being a lot more comfortable with this edition, I'd like to make a setting that includes the "new" races and concepts as part of the setting foundations (rather than being tacked on), while also exploring alternate fluff and more cultural diversity (than just the standard pseudo-medieval Europe all over again), and trying to get away from some of the standard fantasy tropes inherent in many of the established settings.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I've yet to see the game that uses 100% published material - no human being can remember everything printed THAT clearly.

That said, I use a published setting (Primeval Thule) mixed with ideas from the World of Xoth, various incarnations of Lankhmar, and old al-Qadim and Spelljammer stuff. All that stuff was published; how does it count?

"Make it work" is my motto.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Much prefer to run homebrew. But in 5e I've mainly run published content since the lion share of my gaming has been in AL.

 

[Blue]

When I run, I homebrew. The setting is tailored to the campaign, just like the setting in a book supports the story. I also really enjoy world building, especially the mythos behind it and the friction between cultures.

When I play, I like either homebrew or published, with a preference for a setting that affects the campaign like an Eberron campaign where some of the major players and mysteries are involved vs. a setting just being a place to be. While I like both sides, the one thing I don't like is a hybrid of a alternate universe of a published setting unless they've customized it so heavily to file off the serial numbers.

One main advantage of a published campaign during play is that it's shorthand between the players and the DM. If the DM talks about The Zhentarim, we have a clear idea of what that means while in a homebrew a DM will need to give us what our characters know if they introduce a member of a well known group. By a hybrid means that you can't trust any of the shorthand and you not only lose that advantage, but you can also potentially mix up what you know about the published X and this game's X of the same name but different details.

This actually feeds back into a dislike of running published campaigns - when a player is aware of details that I am not. For example FR has a bunch of novels, and I can think I'm running bog-standard X directly from the setting products, but a player may intentionally or unintentionally mix in material from the novels and assume it's true. I'd hate to find out half a dozen sessions later that the reason they trusted an NPC is because he publicly redeemed himself in book X and the players were guided by that but I had him still being a snake. It's not reasonable for a player to know if any particular bit of information came from what source that they can edit it out.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

....
This actually feeds back into a dislike of running published campaigns - when a player is aware of details that I am not. For example FR has a bunch of novels, and I can think I'm running bog-standard X directly from the setting products, but a player may intentionally or unintentionally mix in material from the novels and assume it's true. I'd hate to find out half a dozen sessions later that the reason they trusted an NPC is because he publicly redeemed himself in book X and the players were guided by that but I had him still being a snake. It's not reasonable for a player to know if any particular bit of information came from what source that they can edit it out.

I actually warn my players when I run published stuff in a home campaign that they should hold no assumptions regarding NPCs or events and should ask for clarification when they have a question. I may be running a game in that world but it's still 95% MY world.

 

[Blue]

I actually warn my players when I run published stuff in a home campaign that they should hold no assumptions regarding NPCs or events and should ask for clarification when they have a question. I may be running a game in that world but it's still 95% MY world.

I'd play that - it's a homebrew that shares some things from a published world but I should expect the DM to treat it like a homebrew and tell us information out character knows instead of relying on the shorthand of a shared knowledge of a published world.

My problem is when the DM only goes half-way. If you tell me it's your homebrew and then describe Waterdeep, I'm not going to assume my character knows it's led by a masked council with one public figure unless you tell us that is true, but then don't penalize us for not thinking to bring something to the open Lord of Waterdeep. (And the flip side, if you say you're running standard FR and we do make that assumption, don't penalize us if you changed it and didn't tell us.)

 

[Sleepy Walker]

I'd play that - it's a homebrew that shares some things from a published world but I should expect the DM to treat it like a homebrew and tell us information out character knows instead of relying on the shorthand of a shared knowledge of a published world.

My problem is when the DM only goes half-way. If you tell me it's your homebrew and then describe Waterdeep, I'm not going to assume my character knows it's led by a masked council with one public figure unless you tell us that is true, but then don't penalize us for not thinking to bring something to the open Lord of Waterdeep. (And the flip side, if you say you're running standard FR and we do make that assumption, don't penalize us if you changed it and didn't tell us.)

Agreed, since I've learned that assumptions can bite you in the butt, especially when it comes to plot or creature motivations. Assume that an antimagic field stops beholder eye rays (if your character has a reasonable chance of knowing that), not that the beholder happens to be hostile or less than hostile because of reasons (so far as a player I have meet 2 beholders, with 1 using us as minions and the other attacking soon after springing a trap).

That is why if I am about to make an assumption about the game world I ask my DM. "Do I know what this thing is?" "Do I know what Waterdeep is?" (actual question when I first started playing) If a DM is assuming the random assortment of characters, thrust together under strange circumstances, will know everything about the setting, then I'm sure going to have a conversation with that DM about what exactly I am supposed to know. (which didn't save any time or effort, so I do not know why anyone would do that unless it is a long campaign seeing new people)

 

[Mr. Wilson]

I don't always play in a published setting, but when I do, I play in Eberron.

(Right now, we're playing in my 20 year old homebrewed setting, but next DnD game will take place back in Eberron, which is the group default setting of choice).