[DM's Poll] Homebrew, Published, Hybrid or Other?

[Agamon]

I've done all of the above at least once, but I prefer running the Published Hybrid. I prefer to work with the bounds of a published setting, but then change up, often drastically.

 

[the Jester]

I voted "homebrew hybrid". The setting itself is homebrewed, but I do include my own version of some setting-specific stuff, such as Torog, Boccob, etc.

 

[howandwhy99]

None of the above, oddly. For me, the generation of a campaign world for every campaign makes it a homebrew. Players submit elements they want in, which are then converted and included into the world. Those elements could be commercially published campaign settings or adventure modules. They are usually backgrounds, a custom race, subclass, item, spell, or other element the players want in the game. But they could be published works too.

What this process does is allow enormous freedom for the players to submit almost anything they want. But it retains the status of a game by incorporating these into game structures defined by the game rules, generating them into the world, and letting the players game them during play.

It's sort of a kitchen sink, anything goes world, but it's really about putting players in the same situation we are in in our world. We don't know if unicorns exist or not in our reality. They could be and we haven't encountered any yet. Or there might not be. In D&D, the players start in a small area with a background of limited knowledge. Right or wrong that is their starting knowledge of the setting, but as they explore it grows. What is in the world is held in either potential or actual status. Actual being the finite portion of the universe they sense at any given moment. Potential being even beyond their imagining.

 

[Sunseeker]

Homebrew all the way baby!

I mean, my worlds generally conform to pretty typical fantasy tropes, but I try to avoid published material actually being in my game, instead using it only for inspiration.

 

[Storminator]

I went with Published. I play in Eberron, and at the start of the campaign it was pretty much exactly as the book describes. Now that we're 12 levels into the game, the world is heavily impacted.

I haven't done any modules this time, tho I usually do. I find 4e pretty dang easy to run adventures for, and there aren't many adventures that assume the PCs are goblins bent on world domination (and possibly destruction after last session).

PS

 

[Nellisir]

Homebrew Traditionalist, close to Homebrew Puritan. I read all sorts of other campaign settings and adventures for ideas, but I don't steal any setting details and usually I steal maps and stat blocks from adventures, not plot lines or the adventures themselves.

 

[grodog]

Depending on the game, I would range from Homebrew Traditionalist to Homebrew Hybrid to "The Medley" to Published Hybrid. In general I probably lead toward Published Hybrid via Greyhawk, but it does depend on the campaign I'm running, too.

None of the above, oddly. For me, the generation of a campaign world for every campaign makes it a homebrew.

That's similar to my approach, but I use Greyhawk as one of my two primary campaign worlds, while the other is a homebrew, and PCs planar travel across both regularly, starting at very low levels. So for me, it depends on what kind of campaign I want to run, and how variant it is to GH or my world: a Greyhawk ice age game would be very different from a traditional game in the Wild Coast, for example.

 

[Yora]

Even though I run my Ancient Lands campaigns in D&D, it's not a D&D setting. I try to avoid any creatures that are unique to D&D and have a completely different cosmology. I also usually use a spell-point magic system.
The major exception are aboleths, which are just too cool not to have. And making a rippoff-clone seems silly for an OGL creature.

The demons are based on Dragon Age, the Underworld on Eberron, the naga both on Warcraft and D&D. The lizardfolk fall in two civilizations, based on the Jungle Trolls from Warcraft and the Turians from Mass Effect. Sorcerers are a mashup of Maleficar from Dragon Age, Defilers from Dark Sun, and the Sith from Star Wars.
The campaign I'll start in two weeks is inspired by two levels from Dragon Age and Mass Effect, significantly expanded and interwoven with each other.
I take from so many sources and mix and rearange things, that it would probably impossible to exactly pin down anything as being a direct adaptation from a different setting.

 

[ccooke]

Homebrew purist, definitely.

I've never even tried to run a published setting. I probably should, at some point, just to give it a try. But I love having control of the world and having the demographics and "feel" of the world in my head.

Most of my GM style is improvisational, too, and I think that would be much, much harder (for me) with a published setting.

 

[Halivar]

Homebrew purist, definitely.

I've never even tried to run a published setting. I probably should, at some point, just to give it a try. But I love having control of the world and having the demographics and "feel" of the world in my head.

Most of my GM style is improvisational, too, and I think that would be much, much harder (for me) with a published setting.

Then I suggest ToEE, for sure. There are enough holes in the plot and setting to make your improvisational muse sing.