D&D General Do You Run Published Adventures, Homebrew Adventures, or Some of Both?

[doctorbadwolf]

Primarily home brew. It's so much easier to tweak and alter stuff rather than read a module and try to mimic what's presented at the table. It also prevents players from having read the module and I'm not a fan of railroads, so it all works out.

I keep telling the newer DMs in my group this. Trying to run CoS as her first ever DMing experience went surprisingly well in the first and second session, wherein she ran Death House. After that, she accidentally deviated from the module in how we met the Vistani, and she had to retcon it later to make later events work.

Combine that with her craftiness, by which she made very detailed hand drawn full-size versions of the maps in the adventure, seriously every little tchotchke in Death House was on those maps. Every item in every room that could be on a top down 2d map, and she got burnt out.

Which sucks, because she is very good. Luckily she has had more luck using small adventures she feels more free to use as a starting point and improvising from, with her book club.

My other friend started a Waterdeep game, and not only gets stressed about the adventure itself and what to keep vs replace or alter, but also about the Realms in general and all it’s damn lore.

I didn’t help there, by making a Netherese refugee whose mother was a Shadovar knight and father was a Bedine-descended potter.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

I voted home brew, because I think that fits the spirit of this poll.

My game really a playtest for adventure that I plan to later publish, so they will be published adventures but they aren't while I'm running them.

 

[delericho]

At the moment it's primarily homebrew. My pattern of games is rather unusual, which means that published adventures don't fit terribly well. I've used more published adventures in the past - and that was after a long time of never using any.

 

[Burnside]

The exact opposite of my experience. I have rarely seen post-2E things I'd want to run (actually, when it comes to modules I am all 1E/BECMI, and only dip into 2E Dungeon Adventures, not the modules).

Part of my 2E issue may be that I’m ignorant of the magazine adventures. The regular TSR 2E modules I’ve seen were uniformly terrible.

 

[Lanefan]

I think this is more common than we think, and doesn't fit neatly into either category of purely "published" or "homebrew". Homebrew, to me, means something purely original of your own creation. So I would not consider piecing published materials in a different order or arrangement as homebrew. Maybe we should have some more distinctions in the poll, like:

1. Published as written (i.e. out of the box, official).
2. Published with some modifications (i.e. tinkerer).
3. Mix-and-match materials from multiple published sources (i.e. revised or reimagined, aka "MacGuyver")
4. Completely original (i.e. homebrew).
5. Mix of the above.
6. Something else not listed (please explain).

7. Homebrew but with elements (e.g. a map, or new monsters, or etc.) poached from a published source.

 

[Lanefan]

The exact opposite of my experience. I have rarely seen post-2E things I'd want to run (actually, when it comes to modules I am all 1E/BECMI, and only dip into 2E Dungeon Adventures, not the modules).

There's a few gems to be found in post-2e material if you're willing to dig for 'em. I've converted and run modules from every edition and each edition has had its successes and failures.

 

[Lanefan]

Part of my 2E issue may be that I’m ignorant of the magazine adventures. The regular TSR 2E modules I’ve seen were uniformly terrible.

Most were. I got good use out of For Duty and Deity in a past campaign, however, with minimal modification other than that the captured deity was herself a homebrew creation.

 

[el-remmen]

Part of my 2E issue may be that I’m ignorant of the magazine adventures. The regular TSR 2E modules I’ve seen were uniformly terrible.

I agree with you 100% - at least among the ones I was unfortunate enough to purchase or lucky enough to look through first.

 

[gamerprinter]

I clicked "Primarily homebrew adventure", but that isn't true the "Primarily" identifier doesn't apply. It should be, I "Only homebrew adventure". And sometimes, I publish those adventures. I've got my own stories to tell, I don't need anyone else's module. I was homebrewing years before 2e, after the first 2 years playing 1e, I went homebrew and never returned. I buy supplements, and rarely settings (back in 1e/2e days only), not modules.

 

[el-remmen]

There's a few gems to be found in post-2e material if you're willing to dig for 'em. I've converted and run modules from every edition and each edition has had its successes and failures.

Sure, the operative word in Burnie's post was "rarely" suggesting those gems do exist.