I am a homebrew snob

[MonsterMash]

I homebrew and I use published settings and materials - I've no objection to using other peoples ideas and work or my own, neither is always better or worse.

 

[Hjorimir]

I run a Final Fantasy type game in an Egyptian Setting. I have never opened up a Dungeon or Dragon magazine and found an egyptian adventure or Final Fantasy adventure, But I"ve managed to use a half dozen adventures from them in my campaigns within the year.

I can't see the logic in saying it takes longer to build a house than the renovate a house. With a published adventure, you already got the structure, descriptions, npcs and text. I have a pretty simple and easy method. I read it, note all the npcs and if i can replace them with current game npcs (check). Look at the setting and see where it would be in the world (check). Look at the final treasure and usually replace it with some in game artifact (check). Replace any monsters I don't like or find inappropriate (check). And Im done voila instant input of a premade adventure.

Well, you've never played in my campaign. Our group of players can spot a published adventure a mile away...even if the DM doesn't bring it to the table. We can tell when something just seems out of context. Myself, I run a world where all the PCs are human (because that's the only choice I give them), magic items have very different rules on what can and cannot be created, a very distinct list of monsters broken down by geographical region, guides to the given architecture available broken down by geographical region, a monotheistic faith (which leaves little room for a lot of plots that are published), etc. The list goes on.

Really, it is easier for me to create an adventure (which doesn't take long; maybe one hour prep for three to four hours gameplay) than to try and adapt one. Heck, it takes longer to read the adventure than it takes for me to create one. I've already spent my hours (and hour and hours) in the creation of the campaign setting. Now that the logic is there, the rest falls into place quite easily.

I guess I'm different that way.

 

[Desdichado]

I've never played in a homebrew that was anywhere near as good as its creator thought it was.

And I've played in quite a few homebrews. Some that took years to develop.

See, that's just silly. What's the difference between a homebrew and an "official" setting anyway? FR and Eberron are just homebrews that went to the big city and got their name's in lights.

I'm addicted to homebrewing, but I'm not a snob about it. I have no problem playing a game in just about any setting. There are even a handful of published settings I'd run although not many. I've run published adventures here and there from time to time, although not often, but I read published adventures a fair amount and steal all kinds of elements from them.

Maybe I'm just the odd one here, but to me, not homebrewing is the timesaver, not the other way around. To correctly run, say, the Shackled City adventure path in the Forgotten Realms, I need to read all the FR books and be familiar with them. I need to read all the adventures several times, and know them very well inside and out. I need to have much more of a plan to run something published as opposed to something homebrewed, where I just need a vague outline and a handful of stats.

So, beside the fact that I can't really run anything without making it my own and tweaking it a bit (which is reason enough to prefer homebrewing) I don't often do published material because it's so much harder and time-consuming to do so.

 

[fusangite]

I've never played in a homebrew that was anywhere near as good as its creator thought it was.

And I've played in quite a few homebrews. Some that took years to develop.

I guess we've just had opposite experiences. With the exception of Glorantha, I cannot recall ever playing in a published setting that was better than a homebrew.

 

[NewLifeForm]

Shaman, help us to help you...



Sorry, but I to must stand before the circle and admit a bit of snobbery in regards to homebrew (yay!) vs. pre-fab (boo!).

At the same time, I've been known to use a module or two back in my early years (horribly twisted beyond recognition of course) and some of my most popular campaigns have been set in the Star Trek and Star Wars universes. So what does it all mean?

Generally, I prefer to create my own characters, stories, magic items and creatures. I'll take a good idea and use it no matter where it comes from. I just don't like the feel of the adventures in Dungeon and most pre-published products because, frankly, they don't really have a "feel". This is probably on purpose to some extent, to make them compatible with as many different campaigns as possible.

NewLifeForm
Crazy as I Wanna Be

 

[Henry]

I am a rules snob; I have no use for prepublished rules and I don't understand those who do. The idea of using game rules and dice that some designer has made makes me itch uncontrollably. Role Playing Games are the pre-published path to creative ruin! Why on earth would I want to play someone else's GAME RULES! I don't know where those have been!

Hear my cry, hobbyists!! Throw off your D&D/Modern/GURPS/White Wolf/HERO shackles! Forsake OD&D (1974 edition)! Stand up as one and show the love for a good old fashioned afternoon of Cops & Robbers! Stand up with pride as you argue about who killed whom!

 

[DonTadow]

Well, you've never played in my campaign. Our group of players can spot a published adventure a mile away...even if the DM doesn't bring it to the table. We can tell when something just seems out of context. Myself, I run a world where all the PCs are human (because that's the only choice I give them), magic items have very different rules on what can and cannot be created, a very distinct list of monsters broken down by geographical region, guides to the given architecture available broken down by geographical region, a monotheistic faith (which leaves little room for a lot of plots that are published), etc. The list goes on.

Really, it is easier for me to create an adventure (which doesn't take long; maybe one hour prep for three to four hours gameplay) than to try and adapt one. Heck, it takes longer to read the adventure than it takes for me to create one. I've already spent my hours (and hour and hours) in the creation of the campaign setting. Now that the logic is there, the rest falls into place quite easily.

I guess I'm different that way.

Not critiquing but maybe you're not doing a good job of merging it. I play with seasoned vets as well and if I do it well they can't see it and it still doesn't take as much time. There are good writers and good editors and you have to be a good editor to take a published work and make it your own.

I am a rules snob; I have no use for prepublished rules and I don't understand those who do. The idea of using game rules and dice that some designer has made makes me itch uncontrollably. Role Playing Games are the pre-published path to creative ruin! Why on earth would I want to play someone else's GAME RULES! I don't know where those have been!

Hear my cry, hobbyists!! Throw off your D&D/Modern/GURPS/White Wolf/HERO shackles! Forsake OD&D (1974 edition)! Stand up as one and show the love for a good old fashioned afternoon of Cops & Robbers! Stand up with pride as you argue about who killed whom!

Let me get this straight, let us play a game without rules? Everone make up their own rules? This is ... well it just doesn't make sense. By defination you can't have a game without rules, nor will you have agood game making them up on the spot.

 

[Hjorimir]

The only thing that beat a good game of Cops & Robbers is a good game of Doctor.

 

[leporidae]

My campaigns have all been homebrewed, not because I think my worlds are superior to the published campaigns, but because world creation is what I enjoy most about being a gamemaster. Also, I don't think it is that much more work - for me it's mostly a sort of structured daydreaming. I spend a few minutes thinking about what each of the major NPC groups are planning to do, and also from each characters perspective, so that everyone will have a hook for the adventure.

My players aren't overly interested in the background - so I just have to come up with a broad overview of the world (usually my favorite part) and a layer of detail for what they will definitely encounter in the next week. More planning than that is usually a waste of time, because my players like to go off in their own direction.

For me, it usually takes about as much time to prepare for a prepackaged module, at least if I don't want to be as surprised as the players about what happens on the next page.

 

[Hjorimir]

Don, seriously, it isn't a lack of skill on my part. It stems from the fact that I run campaigns and I don't really run adventures. The PCs will be involved in over-the-top political intrigue, Machiavellian church politics (inquisition, excommunication, and I’ve even burned a PC at the stake for heresy), escaped fiends, maniacal recurring villain necromancers (who are working on their own plans), the shifting reality of the Actuality, and other sundry plots. Then if I try to stick them in the Steading of the Hill Giant Chief they start saying what the heck does this have to do with anything? This doesn’t make sense at all. Why are we wasting our time with these stupid hill giants while the basis of our faith is unraveling?

Adventures, by their very nature, are inimical to our gaming style. But I will stand by my earlier statement; it isn’t because publishers are not writing good material, it is because what they write just doesn’t incorporate itself well with my plots and setting.