Question for Players: Commercial or Homebrew?
Ahnehnois
First Post
As a player (not my main role, mind you) I generally prefer a well-done homebrew. The DM needs to maintain authority over the game, and if he has some external canon that people feel he needs to abide by, it does not help. The DM presumably has a personality and a philosophy that underlie his play. The world needs to reflect this as well, so what better way than to create your own world?
I've played a number of games but very few in published settings. Homebrews do vary in quality but I've always found them at least pasable in their artistry and coherence.
As a DM I homebrew.
That's for D&D and some other games. If I ever get around to running a BSG game I'm keeping within that universe pretty solidly.
I've played a number of games but very few in published settings. Homebrews do vary in quality but I've always found them at least pasable in their artistry and coherence.
As a DM I homebrew.
That's for D&D and some other games. If I ever get around to running a BSG game I'm keeping within that universe pretty solidly.
Angel Tarragon
Dawn Dragon
As a player it doesn't mateer to me what the campaign setting is. So long as it is detailed enough to make a suitable caharcter and has enough of a history to draw from for character background I'm a happy camper.
Darrin Drader
Explorer
I'll give my answer as a DM.
I have no preference. On one hand, I set no less than 3 long-term campaigns in my homebrew called Galovinius (what I have documented of it is available for download at my website). Players loved it, I enjoyed running it and developing it, and after a grand total of about six years of running it, I really wanted to ditch it and do something else for a while.
I usually make my campaigns pretty epic, so I always feel like I'm running roughshod over things that I shouldn't in Forgotten Realms. Incidentally, I find the Loudwater controversy amusing because the last FR game I ran, I picked Loudwater to base the campaign around because I thought it would be the last place in the world they would pick to develop. As it turned out, there was already a pretty extensive Living FR campaign set there. D'oh!
What I like about Golarion is that it's designed for numerous epic storylines. I could run the APs, which all pretty much fit my game style, and not run out of stuff to do there. What's more is that with all the diversity of the setting, there is plenty that can be done off the beaten path. I do fear that it could eventually develop the FR problem, but that should be some time away.
Finally, there's Aereth by Goodman Games, which has all the things I like about a published setting, but it's wide open in terms of development, which means that I can blow up sections of the world and no one is going to care. That's one world that is reasonably well detailed, but I can customize it as I see fit. If it weren't for Paizo blowing me away with the whole Pathfinder line, we would actually be using Aereth for the campaign I'm starting up next month.
Galovinius may get resurrected at some point in the future, but I really need to find some new direction to go with it. I feel like I've already blown it up one too many times and the world needs a break for a while.
I have no preference. On one hand, I set no less than 3 long-term campaigns in my homebrew called Galovinius (what I have documented of it is available for download at my website). Players loved it, I enjoyed running it and developing it, and after a grand total of about six years of running it, I really wanted to ditch it and do something else for a while.
I usually make my campaigns pretty epic, so I always feel like I'm running roughshod over things that I shouldn't in Forgotten Realms. Incidentally, I find the Loudwater controversy amusing because the last FR game I ran, I picked Loudwater to base the campaign around because I thought it would be the last place in the world they would pick to develop. As it turned out, there was already a pretty extensive Living FR campaign set there. D'oh!
What I like about Golarion is that it's designed for numerous epic storylines. I could run the APs, which all pretty much fit my game style, and not run out of stuff to do there. What's more is that with all the diversity of the setting, there is plenty that can be done off the beaten path. I do fear that it could eventually develop the FR problem, but that should be some time away.
Finally, there's Aereth by Goodman Games, which has all the things I like about a published setting, but it's wide open in terms of development, which means that I can blow up sections of the world and no one is going to care. That's one world that is reasonably well detailed, but I can customize it as I see fit. If it weren't for Paizo blowing me away with the whole Pathfinder line, we would actually be using Aereth for the campaign I'm starting up next month.
Galovinius may get resurrected at some point in the future, but I really need to find some new direction to go with it. I feel like I've already blown it up one too many times and the world needs a break for a while.
blargney the second
blargney the minute's son
Both, but for different reasons.
I like commercial settings because I can make characters with a backstory incorporating elements of the world that I'm interested in exploring.
I like homebrews because I can make tofu characters - I don't know anything about the world, so I just soak up the flavour as I come across it.
-blarg
I like commercial settings because I can make characters with a backstory incorporating elements of the world that I'm interested in exploring.
I like homebrews because I can make tofu characters - I don't know anything about the world, so I just soak up the flavour as I come across it.
-blarg
Wormwood
Adventurer
As a player: it depends entirely on the DM.
I've had bad experiences with DMs who devote more effort to detailing their settings than crafting entertaining adventures.
Similarly, I've had bad experiences with DMs who are so locked into 'official canon' that the group feels sidelined.
I've had bad experiences with DMs who devote more effort to detailing their settings than crafting entertaining adventures.
Similarly, I've had bad experiences with DMs who are so locked into 'official canon' that the group feels sidelined.
Homebrew, for several reasons.
First of all, it usually means that we as players have more of a chance to help build the world - using backstories and ideas that we have during the campaign. Also, the homebrews I have played in have had so much more flavour than the commercial settings. This might have something to do with what is probably my main reason, that DMs will usually have much more love for their own homebrews.
On the other hand the DMs I know often don't have the time needed for a homebrew, so it is a good thing that there are some decent commercial settings around.
First of all, it usually means that we as players have more of a chance to help build the world - using backstories and ideas that we have during the campaign. Also, the homebrews I have played in have had so much more flavour than the commercial settings. This might have something to do with what is probably my main reason, that DMs will usually have much more love for their own homebrews.
On the other hand the DMs I know often don't have the time needed for a homebrew, so it is a good thing that there are some decent commercial settings around.
Personally, I prefer commercial campaign settings. My feeling is that they put the players and the DM on equal footing creatively.
In my experience, homebrew worlds are a mastubatory exercise in PC railroading. Most are an excuse for some schmuck DM to impose his personal aesthetics on players, while hiding behind the smoke screen of "Sorry...Paladins don't fit my world" Those that aren't have probably been published. I just don't see any good reason to wile away the hours working on a custom setting while there are a number of pre-established and ready made campaigns on the shelves already, unless you plan to railroad the game to oblivion.
Dungeons & Dragons is supposed to be a game, one that is played for fun. When a DM prioritizes artistic expression over fun in a game, then they are not doing their job....furthermore, going to a game expecting D&D and getting "Sit Down and Let Me Read From My Newest Fantasy Masterpiece" instead is an immediate joykill for me. If an epic story that is under your exclusive control is what you want out of your game, then you should be writing a novel instead...D&D is supposed to be a collaborative effort.
In my experience, homebrew worlds are a mastubatory exercise in PC railroading. Most are an excuse for some schmuck DM to impose his personal aesthetics on players, while hiding behind the smoke screen of "Sorry...Paladins don't fit my world" Those that aren't have probably been published. I just don't see any good reason to wile away the hours working on a custom setting while there are a number of pre-established and ready made campaigns on the shelves already, unless you plan to railroad the game to oblivion.
Dungeons & Dragons is supposed to be a game, one that is played for fun. When a DM prioritizes artistic expression over fun in a game, then they are not doing their job....furthermore, going to a game expecting D&D and getting "Sit Down and Let Me Read From My Newest Fantasy Masterpiece" instead is an immediate joykill for me. If an epic story that is under your exclusive control is what you want out of your game, then you should be writing a novel instead...D&D is supposed to be a collaborative effort.
Last edited:
Silvercat Moonpaw
Adventurer
So is there a way to do homebrews right in your opinion, or should everyone leave it entirely up to professional designers?
Similar Threads
- Poll
