Why D&D is slowly cutting its own throat.

[Sholari]

I don't think there's much to the idea that writing good fluff is particularly difficult. Every single homebrew GM worth his Cheetos writes good fluff. And there's lots of those homebrewers out there.

I think that is entirely the problem. In my experience most homebrew GMs think they can put together a better gaming experience than if they used a module, but I've only seen one guy that could actually pull it off. Most of the homebrew games I have sat in have ranged from marginal to terrible. If more GMs used some of the better quality modules out there, I think it would make for a better roleplaying experience for their players overall.

 

[The Shaman]

In my experience most homebrew GMs think they can put together a better gaming experience than if they used a module, but I've only seen one guy that could actually pull it off. Most of the homebrew games I have sat in have ranged from marginal to terrible. If more GMs used some of the better quality modules out there, I think it would make for a better roleplaying experience for their players overall.

As a perpetual hombrewer, I'm very curious about this, Sholari - what makes published modules better than the homebrew adventures (and campaign-settings?) you experienced?

 

[Wild Gazebo]

Yes, that is the exact opposite of my experiences.

 

[Jorren]

I think that is entirely the problem. In my experience most homebrew GMs think they can put together a better gaming experience than if they used a module, but I've only seen one guy that could actually pull it off. Most of the homebrew games I have sat in have ranged from marginal to terrible. If more GMs used some of the better quality modules out there, I think it would make for a better roleplaying experience for their players overall.

I think that's being a bit too generous. Most homebrew 'fluff' that I've seen is abysmal, and I'm talking about playing with good GMs that put time and effort into it. The situation is even worse when you consider homebrew campaign settings. For the most part, it's the same thing you see from professional publishing, without the polish. That being said, it's possible to have just as much fun with a slapped together homebrew as with a professionally done module or setting. In other words, good fluff does not necessarily equal a fun game.

 

[Pielorinho]

I think that's being a bit too generous. Most homebrew 'fluff' that I've seen is abysmal, and I'm talking about playing with good GMs that put time and effort into it. The situation is even worse when you consider homebrew campaign settings. For the most part, it's the same thing you see from professional publishing, without the polish. That being said, it's possible to have just as much fun with a slapped together homebrew as with a professionally done module or setting. In other words, good fluff does not necessarily equal a fun game.

Interesting. I'm not claiming any great status for myself as a DM, but I've found consistently that my players have the least fun when I work from a prepared module, to the extent that I had one player more or less tell me she didn't want to play in any campaign arc involving a published adventure. Perhaps it's just a different playstyle--for myself as a DM, it'd be much easier to work from published material, but I just don't seem to be able to pull it off very effectively, at least not with my group.

(When I have gotten published stuff to work well, it's usually involved even more work totally rewriting the adventure than I would have done if I'd started from scratch).

Daniel

 

[Psion]

Interesting. I'm not claiming any great status for myself as a DM, but I've found consistently that my players have the least fun when I work from a prepared module,

Yeah, I've gotten comments to that effect before.

The more I remodel and the less faithfulness I feel towards the "intent" of a published model, the better a time we seem to have.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I bet the "fun" factor from homebrews comes from a few characteristics:

1) The perception of more flexibility. Many gamers have a perception that commercial modules, deservedly or not, are railroad fests. After all, the thing IS completely scripted, right? (Nevermind that the homebrew probably is as well- its perception that matters.)

2) The "home-made" factor. Your Mom's fried chicken is "better" than store bought, not because its tastier (it may be- but that's not the issue) but the fact that she took the time to make it for you. When you get homebrewed adventures, you know your GM put in some serious time on it (whether he did or not)! That perception probably leads to a predisposition to judge the adventure favorably.

3) The "Tailor-made" factor. Your GM knows better than the pro writers what you want. If you're a hacker, his adventures will be all killer, no filler. If your group is full of amateur thespians, everyone will get their chance in the spotlight, and combat occurs only when absolutely neccessary.

 

[francisca]

Interesting. I'm not claiming any great status for myself as a DM, but I've found consistently that my players have the least fun when I work from a prepared module

Same experience here.

I think it comes from the fact that as a DM writing an adventure, or massively retrofitting an existing module, you tune it a bit for your table. In my case, I think it's largely subconscious, but I'm pretty dang sure I'm doing it.

 

[Umbran]

3) The "Tailor-made" factor.

This one surely is true. And it is part of the reason I keep saying that much of teh "good fluff" out there isn't very applicable outside of its home turf. Often enough, it is created for a specific audience, with specific needs. A really fine tailored suit is great for the person it was made to fit, but not of much use to anyone else.

And, conversely, a decent suit that isn't well taiored to fit the individual is not particularly satisfying either. Doesn't matter if the suit is fluffy or crunchy.

 

[Sholari]

As a perpetual hombrewer, I'm very curious about this, Sholari - what makes published modules better than the homebrew adventures (and campaign-settings?) you experienced?

Anyone can slap together a homebrew and there is nothing to ensure any level of quality, so you are really only going to get the product of the GMs skill. I would say that most GMs out there aren't as good as they think they are. For a published adventure there tends to be a higher level of quality control, depending on the level of investment required and the sophistication of the publisher. For PDFs they are a lot easier to put out there and so they are not much better that what people can put together as a homebrew. For something like Dungeon magazine there is a lot more of a quality control and you are essentially competing against a bunch of other potential authors to get published. For those people who have sworn off published adventures I would say they have probably never been through a good quality published adventure or the GM just doesn't know how to run a published adventure very well.