Homebrews - Who's starting over?

[Aust Diamondew]

If I convert to 4e I'll stick with my current homebrew probably, just finished making this one and I like it. If theres things I don't like about the fluff/mechanics of 4e races I can change them.
And I already have very simple pantheons of gods for my homebrew, so I'll just add any new gods I like from 4e and update the domains of my existing gods.

I'll have to remake some NPCs (and the PCs will have to remake their characters if they're still using the same ones) but other than that shouldn't be a big deal.

 

[Shieldhaven]

My homebrew setting exists in part to give me a sandbox for my 3.5e rules experimentation. What can I say, I'm a professional gearhead... and I keep it going in my free time. I dimly suspect, though I haven't made this a firm decision yet, that when 4e comes out I'll take about a month off from running that campaign so I can retool my rules changes to fit, and I'll also start up a core-rules 4e campaign.

Haven

 

[Stormtalon]

I'm already planning on keeping the (sorta) homebrew I've got going now, only advancing it 10-20 years. That'll let certain things settle out and set the stage for big things to start happening in various regions. Heck, as it is, the fragments of Eberron floating in my world are set 100 years beyond the setting itself anyway....

I do know I'm going to have to ditch "Common" and have Draconic become the universal language. That seed has already been planted in my current campaign.

 

[Mercule]

I had been planning my current campaign as a send-off for the homebrew setting I created back in the early 1980s. I'm running an arc designed to do several reveals for the couple of players I've been gaming with since the early 1990s (the rest of the group has evolved). There's also the potential built in to flush the whole world should the PCs fail. I've got a bunch of ideas for other settings floating around, anyway.

On the other hand, some of what I'm hearing about 4E seems to fit my original vision for the setting quite well. As others have said, the elf/eladrin split works very well for me (and the number of people who have said that gives me great confidence is the direction WotC is taking things).

Even if the PCs succeed, the nature of divine magic will be disrupted, civilizations will be (have been) leveled, psionics suppressed, and much great learning hidden. Sounds like I'm poised for a 100 year jump and "points of light in the darkness".

So, the short answer is: I need to wait and see 1) what 4E looks like, 2) what state my setting is left in, 3) what appeals to me at that moment, 4) what appeals to my players at that moment. For all I know, we'll end up playing Aces & Eights. The only certainty is that my next campaign will have a tone and theme, but no planned arc.

 

[el-remmen]

If 4E wins me over, then I plan to create a whole new setting.

If it does not I will stick with Aquerra.

But even if the former is the case, I will stick with the rules as my group uses them now until the current campaign is over - which may not be for another 3 to 5 years or so, if I go by the the length of my previous campaigns.

 

[Remathilis]

I plan to end my current Eberron game when 4e comes out, dust off my old homebrew (Enderia), advance the timeline 100+ years, and start with a "points of light" default-style game, making the changes as needed.

Its actually got me WANTING to homebrew, something 3e didn't, for reason I cannot explain...

 

[Cadfan]

I find it very difficult to figure out how 4e could be incompatible with your setting.

If the problem is something like 4e describing elves as forest dwellers with ADD, and you've always played them as noble and stoic wizards, just... ignore the fluff.

If the problem is that 4e has a Warlord class and your campaign doesn't, just ban the class.

The only problem I can see legitimately cropping up would be if your setting has extensive Incarnum use or something, and 4e doesn't have Incarnum. That could be a problem. But other than that sort of concern, I don't see how this argument works. If you don't like 4e, then don't play it, but don't tell me that its incompatible with your setting unless there's an actual reason for incompatibility. And "I don't like 4e and don't want it in my setting" is not the same as "4e is incompatible with my setting." If that's what you really mean, say so.

Anyways, personally, I run only short campaigns, generally covering 3 to 8 levels. I'll have no problem converting.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I've been in the works of creating an off-beat campaign setting, most of which is largely fluff-based and in my head, so this shouldn't affect it too much.

I'll probably steal what looks worth stealing, and add it to my homebrew, but I certainly won't be switching wholesale unless there is an overwhelming reason to do wo.

Nyaricus, you've seen a portion of my houserules. Would you switch, if you were me?

RC

 

[Shieldhaven]

Cadfan, I can answer your question at least for myself.

The structure of the classes in my campaign has meaning in the societies of the setting. I don't have wizards and clerics and druids and so forth. Instead, I have eight orders of elementalists. Each order represents three of the six elements (Air, Fire, Metal, Stone, Water, Wood), and the conflict between these orders drives much of the plot and politics. There are also channelers (hybrid casters along the lines of the AE witch class, still based on the same elements) and stewards (a wuxia-like class based on the AE ritual warrior). I also have races of my own devising. Basing all magic on elemental structures means that I've had to build totally new spell lists out of the spells in the PHB, Spell Compendium, PHB II, etc.

The divide between controller and leader, as far as spellcasters go, promises to cause me some serious headaches, and I really don't know what will happen when I try to apply the ideas of my setting to the 4e rules. Elementalists in my campaign are a fusion of wizard and cleric, much as the shugenja of OA are: many have access to healing magic, and many have access to a variety of high-damage spells, but these abilities vary widely.

I'm still excited about 4e, for all that; I love tinkering with rules and finding ways to make them model the kind of game I want to run.

Haven

 

[Horacio]

I don't have a true homebrew world. I tend to use Planescape, and PCs often visit different homebrew prime planes.

I plan to make a homemade Planescape conversion, while waiting for planewalker.com's one. And I will prepare new prime worlds, fully 4e compatibles.