...instead of taking an existing game world, with or without heavy modifications?

My Answer: because unless you do a shitload of hard work and planning, and have the skills to think it through both in terms of world creation, and creating a setting that will be interesting for its Roleplay possibilities, your home brew will suck.

RPGPundit

Of course the same applies to published gameworlds.  If they're not designed with skill and planning, then they suck just as much.  And aren't free...

Yours maybe, but IME the group during play makes the setting a success.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RPGPundit...instead of taking an existing game world, with or without heavy modifications?

My Answer: because unless you do a shitload of hard work and planning, and have the skills to think it through both in terms of world creation, and creating a setting that will be interesting for its Roleplay possibilities, your home brew will suck.

RPGPundit

For the same reason that when I'm creating software, I find an existing piece of software that provides a basic framework, and modify it.

Never write what you can copy.

Creating a setting for RPGs could be taught better and mitigate some of the problems with homebrews. It is not the same as worldbuilding. Nor it is theory more like teaching a practical art.

The biggest problem is the creative ego. People can't believe that the whole of their whiz bang idea isn't perfect. I ran into this problem with module writers and event director in NERO live-action.

Plus products to support the GM in maintain his or her world. Goodman Game's Dungeon Crawl Classics are particularly good for this. Expeditious Retreat makes some good modules that are good for just dropping into a setting.

It's not that hard to create a fantasy world as good as most of the published ones. And it's not clear that creating a Middle Earth, Tekumel, or Young Kingdoms is actually all that important for fun at the table anyway.

There were about a dozen DMs at my high school with their own fantasy worlds, and it used to be a lot of fun talking about how we did things, what happened, questing in other people's worlds to find out about their secrets, etc. More interesting than trying to figure out what someone I don't know had in mind through expensive supplements, anyway.

I find a lot of published settings put in too much info, history, NPCs, etc.

It becomes more work than a homebrew campaign, because you need to study all this stuff (especially if the players have access to the info as well, like Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk) before you can play with it.  

With a homebrew you don't really need to detail the entire world, as long as you have enough material prepared so that the players choices in that world are meaningful.  At the beginning of a game the "world" can be the town and the dungeon.

If the goal of a published setting is to reduce prep-time, I find the amount of setting material included with most modules sufficient.

Quote from: RPGPundit...instead of taking an existing game world, with or without heavy modifications?

Indeed, why not? The vast majority of game settings are not any better than something a competent and imaginative DM could come up with, they only provide more information. But do you need that information? I find that a large share of material in world guides is just factual clutter - it isn't something you couldn't improvise on the spot. "Game-designery" is an overblown concept; for every Barker and S. M. Sechi, you have a dozen average authors whose worlds aren't all that special (although, for general purposes, you don't really need to have something special...). What counts is play-relevant info, something which directly comes up during running the campaign. Most world guides aren't written that way; they offer surprisingly little help at the table.

The best argument for using pre-made worlds is that your work is already done for you (but the same could be said for adventures). However, it isn't that much work to create a functional world; you need a basic concept, a few general rules and stuff like a pantheon, a map, and ideas about some locales the players will visit. The rest is easy to grow organically as the players explore and interact with the millieu. A normal campaign spontaneously generates much of the material you'd get from a guidebook, and do so when such facts become neccessary/come into focus. The world will be as complicated or as simple, as original or as clichéd, and as large or as small as the game group needs. It may not be unique, but it will be custom-tailored and will not engage in superfluous world-building. Unlike many official settings, most of its history will be "for the players, by the players".

This is not an argument against using official settings. It is an argument for "create-as-you-play" worlds. It is only advanced mathematics in the sense of "multiplication and division".

Quote from: StuartIt becomes more work than a homebrew campaign, because you need to study all this stuff (especially if the players have access to the info as well, like Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk) before you can play with it.  

Yeah. Reading, internalising and managing the information of a world guide is as much work as creating the same yourself. There are significant hidden costs: time and effort. Usually boredom, too (I find most game fluff unbearably dry).

The key to a successful and interesting game world is where the player's choices have meaning.

To give player's choices there needs to be a minimum level of detail, along enough NPCs and groups to be fleshed for players to interact with. Beyond that do whatever your interest takes you.

I do recommend for long term settings, that at some point you have your players make character that are part of some major group in your setting. All players play members of the Wizard Guild, or members of the thief, or  part of a temple, or the City Guard. The wealth of detail that the players will add themselves will enrich your game a lot.

My simple answer is because I have more disposable income than disposable time.

That said, I really am a died in the wool homebrewer, so I tend to prefer piecemeal setting supplements with cities/regions that I can cannibalize and stitch together into my own setting.

Quote from: StuartWith a homebrew you don't really need to detail the entire world, as long as you have enough material prepared so that the players choices in that world are meaningful.  At the beginning of a game the "world" can be the town and the dungeon.

For me, that is unsatisfying. That might be all the PCs need, but I find that having some background details to draw from helps me to create the adventures in the first place.

Quote from: StuartWith a homebrew you don't really need to detail the entire world, as long as you have enough material prepared so that the players choices in that world are meaningful.  At the beginning of a game the "world" can be the town and the dungeon.

QFT.

There's a difference between imagining and documenting an entire world, with its history, economics, politics, ecology, mythology, etc., and writing up enough setting material to get started in a game of  D&D.

Quote from: MelanWhat counts is play-relevant info, something which directly comes up during running the campaign. Most world guides aren't written that way; they offer surprisingly little help at the table.

This was my recent experience with the Earthdawn Nations of Barsaive book.

You mean I have 256 pages of detailed history, politics, and NPC characterizations for a region of the world, but if I start a campaign in that region I'd still have to make up 90 per cent of the actual adventure content myself? What the fuck!?

Quote from: HaffrungYou mean I have 256 pages of detailed history, politics, and NPC characterizations for a region of the world, but if I start a campaign in that region I'd still have to make up 90 per cent of the actual adventure content myself? What the fuck!?

My own version is the howling empty wilderness of Greyhawk's 30 mile hexes. One reason why I used Wilderlands as my starting point. And why I so glad to help bring it back nearly 20 years later.

All commercial settings were somebody's homebrew once upon a time.

-clash