D&D General What Kind Of Setting Does Your Group Use?

[zarionofarabel]

What kind of setting does your group use most often?

1) A professionally created setting published by WotC or a 3rd party.
2) A homebrew setting created exclusively by the GM with little or no input from the players.
3) A homebrew setting created using a collaborative effort by the GM and players where everyone has a large amount of input into what is included in the setting.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Collaborative homebrew. I started by remixing Curse of Strahd, but now with player input it has grown into something totally new.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Collaborative homebrew. I brought much of the initial work, but several elements only exist because of players wanting particular options (some of which I wouldn't have been keen on without us figuring out a compromise). The world of Al-Duniyya (as the locals call it) and its Tarrakhuna region couldn't have become anywhere near as rich, complex, and interesting without their input.

 

[ccs]

Closest would be Homebrew Collaborative.

As the DM I'll freely borrow from anything published & mix in my own ideas.
After that players are welcome to add stuff to the world as they like. Unless they run into some aspect I've set in stone....
I've got a mix of player creativity around the table:
•One girls ideas spawned an entire kingdom & culture.
•One girl introduced an assassins guild.
•Two players haven't really added much to date beyond the names/locations of thier hometowns.
•And one player persists in assuming that the game is playing in the FR (as he remembers it from 2e/3x days). Its not - a fact that IS set in stone, and has been communicated to him. And yet....

 

[DND_Reborn]

Unless I am running a published adventure (like Frostmaiden at the moment) I have a homebrew world I run exclusively.

 

[Argyle King]

I voted 3.

Though, I would say that the settings used tend to start with #2 for the core concept, broad strokes, and perhaps a few specific locations, but then have details fleshed out in a manner like #3.

 

[Minigiant]

3

In all the games I'm in, the GM makes the baseline homebrew setting, the players then alter it with their PC's backstories as much as they want as long as they don't contradict the DM's decision.

 

[SkidAce]

I wanted to pick #3, but could not. Had to choose #2.

Players do shape and have input on the world, but the main layout of the world has existed since the mid 80s.

So they have meaningful impact, and we do change things (like adding Guild Wars' Tengu clans), but I can't honestly say large impact when the world history, layout, etc formed so long ago.


Now, if like a lot of folks seem to do nowadays, which is change worlds with campaigns, then #3 all the way.

 

[SkidAce]

And hopefully not a tangent, they also change the world by the actions/inactions of their characters.

So the world is dynamic.

 

[DemoMonkey]

1.5?

A homebrew setting created by ruthlessly plundering published settings and stitching them together into a Campaign Golem.

With all the worldbuilding done on the DM side of the screen and all the world wrecking done on the Player side.