Missing out on the 'new classics'

[Jackelope King]

Exactly. Couldn't you just modify the modules to fit into your homebrew world?

As someone who has only ever run one module ever, I for one can safely answer this with an emphatic "no". The last D&D game I ran was in a world that mixed high-psionics with the natural philosopher outlook of the Age of Exploration, with covens of binders lurking in the shadows and summoning fell spirits. This is pretty typical for me. The other setting that I have which I really want to run features magic restricted to the ruling nobility who use it to safeguard the last stronghold of free humanity from the horrors that lurk on other islands in the Endless Sea, and occasionally hunting dragons for their blood, a key ingredient needed for catalyzed steam for airships.

At best, a module can give me NPC stats, and even those are rarely as useful as I'd want. My taste in fantasy is so hugely different from the "mainstream" fantasy RPG tropes that I've never found one that I could really use. Even the one module that I did run consisted of me lifting the stats for the main monster out of the rules, changing it around to fit my setting, and then transporting the whole module to a city that already existed.

I (and I suspect others like me, even if it seems like a tiny minority of gamers) just can't get value out of published adventures. The full cover price isn't worth essentially having to lift the adventure arc out, strip out the parts that don't mesh, and then rewrite it from scratch.

 

[howandwhy99]

Well, that's a common problem, but one you had to know going into creating that world. The farther you go from the assumed D&D baseline setting, the harder it will be to convert other people's material to something you can use. It's sort of a double edged sword for publishers who want to be distinctive enough to be interesting, but broad enough to be applicable to everyone else's game.

You're pretty much saying at the get go that anything in the way of setting or modules have little to no use for you. Good for you, though. Homebrewing is the best way to game IMO. Creating a setting with little influence from anywhere else is a tough road, but rewarding. Is your setting group designed or have you found a good group of players who are all of similar taste?

 

[Jackelope King]

Well, that's a common problem, but one you had to know going into creating that world. The farther you go from the assumed D&D baseline setting, the harder it will be to convert other people's material to something you can use. It's sort of a double edged sword for publishers who want to be distinctive enough to be interesting, but broad enough to be applicable to everyone else's game.

It is a common problem, and I fully expected it going into it. I don't expect modules to be custom-made for me, so I never had any issues with it. It's just that sometimes shoehorning a module into your game is harder than some people think!

You're pretty much saying at the get go that anything in the way of setting or modules have little to no use for you. Good for you, though. Homebrewing is the best way to game IMO. Creating a setting with little influence from anywhere else is a tough road, but rewarding. Is your setting group designed or have you found a good group of players who are all of similar taste?

It's much more fun for us. My original group enjoyed these sorts of settings quite a bit, and I've found subsequent groups who also seem to enjoy them, so life is good. Homebrew is the way to be (though I do make an exception to that for Eberron and Planescape).