Deliberations of a virgin DM: To brew or not to brew?

[Slapstick]

I just bought the D&D 5e books and was looking to find a group to play with outside of the tabletop group I currently DM in Pathfinder. Fantasy Grounds seemed really cool so I thought I'd give it a shot. Unfortunately there's evidently no GMT 5e DM's at all, so the best option seems to be one (surely there must be people in the GMT region wanting to play!). I'm somewhat experienced as a DM, but I wouldn't exactly give myself a diploma of excellence just yet. Also I can't draw anything to save my life. I don't think I've held a crayon since kindergarten.

Since I'm preparing and gearing up for starting a campaign, I'm considering whether or not to go homebrew. As a player I would prefer non-homebrew. I really like getting to know a setting better in a tabletop game that I will also find elsewhere, be that in books or games. Additionally homebrew stuff can get weird. Homebrew settings sometimes involve a lot of reading, and I try to avoid that as a DM, but it's hard if you want to create a fleshed out backdrop to give your characters some context of why they should even care that the dwarves have invented a new sport called Elfball.

As a DM I really prefer homebrew. Basically I haven't read much of any setting, and I don't feel familiar enough with any setting to be able to portrait it in a good way. A "store-bought" setting also limits how much stuff I can make up on the fly when my players asks random questions. In a homebrew setting nothing I say as a DM will ever be "wrong". If I suddenly want a knighthood to have a sanctuary just over the hill because it would really fit the narrative, tadaa! Epic fortress of knightlyhood with a 500 year history is now part of the setting, and I can keep spinning the tale from the stuff I make up as we all go along, without it breaking anything.

I just thought I'd hear what you guys here at FG prefer. It might be different on a VTT-game than with a group of friends. Regardless I wouldn't want to run a published adventure. I know they're great, and I couldn't write anything better, but if I'm not writing the adventure most of my interest in being a DM disappears.


If you've managed to get through all of that and still have an inexplicable need to keep reading, you can find my current outline of setting here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/dx1z00sc6tcb12x/The%20World%20of%20Neomen.pdf?dl=0). Yes, I have shamelessly stolen names from the Mystara setting :bandit:

[Black Hammer]

I usually prefer homebrew for fantasy games. The only core D&D setting I like is Darksun. Eberron, Dragonlance, and especially Forgotten Realms are just too generic and bland for my tastes. They are also over-developed, as you point out; you don't get a whole lot of room to add things.

However, if you're running a long campaign, I'd be careful about homebrew. A setting created from scratch is best run in shorter arcs, so that you can focus on developing the relevant aspects of the world ahead of time instead of constantly making things up. The former allows you to grow a world organically; the latter results in a bunch of thrown together crap with minimal forethought or consistency. One option is to run a series of shorter campaigns in the same setting. This allows you to give the players some different experiences in your world so they have an idea of how it works.

Essentially, what you want to avoid is saying to your players: "Here's a game world you know very little about, full of unpredictable things. Now commit yourself heavily to a character you can't really create a backstory or context for, because you haven't even got a good grasp of how history and economics work in this world."

[damned]

Welcome Slapstick.
There is always a demand for and room for more GMs. As a 5e GM you will find it easy to recruit players for your game.
You might find that something like the Lost Mines of Phandelver will help ease your transition into GMing on Fantasy Grounds.
However you should do what you want - if the GM isnt having fun then it aint going to work!

[Mortar]

As a player, it really never mattered to me. I just enjoy playing. Homebrew settings each bring their own thing to the table for me. For some people a pre created setting - FR, Dragonlance, Eberron, etc - can bring some familiarity and they already understand where they fit.

As a GM, I think I would have to work a homebrew to be truly happy. For example, I have been a fan of the Forgotten Realms since it first started appearing in the pages of Dragon as little tidbits from Ed Greenwood, and have a huge collection of material through 3.5 editions but I would never try to run a game in it anymore. Players would want to crucify me for destroying the Realms - too high fantasy for me now. To make the players feel like part of the world and that they can truly have an effect a familiar to the players setting wouldn't work. Having said that, I have been thinking about trying run one of the Pathfinder AP's to learn how to run FG from that side of things.

Homebrew are far more work for the GM though, both in the initial creation and the continuation. In the end, it all really depends on what you want to do.

[LordEntrails]

...
However you should do what you want - if the GM isnt having fun then it aint going to work!

This is key. Live by it :)

As for published settings, you have to remember one thing, no matter what is published, you are the DM and if you say that Elminster was a druid, than he was. Doesn't matter what was written or published in any source. Those sources are only references. You get to make them your own.

[Zacchaeus]

Indeed, as has been said above it's personal choice and there's no right answer.

I, personally, have never run a homebrew campaign since when I started out with D&D I didn't have time to create stuff, and computers hadn't really been invented so unless it was in a book it didn't exist. Thus I grew up with published adventures which still required some hours of preparation but not the weeks it would have taken me to come up with something like the Forgotten Realms. And there's another personal thing - I love the Forgotten Realms and hated Dark Sun. So it's really each to his own.

One thing I would say is that there is a learning curve for FG so you might very well want to start of with a published adventure like Lost Mines which will give you a good idea how to create your own modules. There are many posts on here where DMs have tried to jump into the deep end and found the experience frustrating because they are trying to learn too much at once.

[Tycandus]

As a long time (30+years) GM, I've done both, and still find that no matter what you do, published or not, the best games are still the games that the GM/DM tailors to his players. If the player wants his ranger to be part of a group that never left the forest, and watched out for an ancient stand of trees, then he should be. It then becomes the GM's job to work that into whatever environment they're working in. It's always been my stand on player requests to take anything into consideration, and rarely say no. That's what you need to build your game around. Published world/realms merely present you with some defined options to ease world creation. I guarantee you, that no matter how well documented any realm is (taking Forgotten Realms as an example), the Cormyr that I portray isn't going to be the same as the Cormyr the next GM portrays. The only difference in using one of those over a homebrew is that you have to explain a lot more if you make big changes from the published works.

[Zacchaeus]

. The only difference in using one of those over a homebrew is that you have to explain a lot more if you make big changes from the published works.

Not if the players never see the reference material you don't :)

[pacio49]

I just started a new homebrew last fall for my players in 5e. I tried a different approach than other homebrews I had crafted. I let the players come up with their preferred backstories and concepts first, and then wrote an initial setting which supported most of what they had asked for. I gave each player pertinent background information as I fleshed out the world that essentially the players had written to start from, and then I warped things from there to build upon.

Ironically, the players all chose similar backgrounds from out in the countryside of the starting nation in the world. As a result, it's actually in character for them to know very little about the outside world, since they've been local to the region from the getgo. I even skewed the available information about the rest of the nations of the world to put them in 'legendary' terms instead of factual ones. "Legend says, the citizens of this country are all Dragonborn and eat human children for breakfast." That kind of thing. Impressions, rather than dossiers. Keeps it real, and lets them explore where they wanted to go.

Fast forward three months later and the world has really taken off, but it's all been developed along the likely lines of plot arcs and story progressions that the characters are most likely to select from. As they get closer to each decision point for branching pathways, I get a sense of which options are likely to be played through and develop those out next.

It's an interesting approach to a homebrew for me. Always before I would do up an extensive world first, and then populate it with adventures for the characters. Here I've got the character adventures done up first, and I'm extrapolating it out into a gaming world as we go. Keeps me focused where the effort will do the most good from the players' POV.

Just some thoughts on ways to make Homebrews work for you in FG.

[dmkevin]

Hey acolyte,

I'm in the same boat. I'm on GMT (an American in the UK) and like you looking to begin to dm D&D 5.0 on Fantasy Grounds. Maybe it's not a bad idea for those fairly new to FG to practise running a few sessions with like-minded potentially ready dms? That way no players looking for a dm who's totally familiar with FG and 5.0 effects etc. won't be dissappointed. Experienced dms, is this perhaps a bad idea?

BTW, it took forever to figure out how to create the banner below but I'm on my way I hope.

[Mortar]

~ snip

That's actually a pretty cool idea. I have never thought of doing that way before.


Hey acolyte,

I'm in the same boat. I'm on GMT (an American in the UK) and like you looking to begin to dm D&D 5.0 on Fantasy Grounds. Maybe it's not a bad idea for those fairly new to FG to practise running a few sessions with like-minded potentially ready dms? That way no players looking for a dm who's totally familiar with FG and 5.0 effects etc. won't be dissappointed. Experienced dms, is this perhaps a bad idea?

BTW, it took forever to figure out how to create the banner below but I'm on my way I hope.

If you need a guinea pig I am always down to help if we can sync up a time. (GMT -4)

[damned]

I just started a new homebrew last fall for my players in 5e. I tried a different approach than other homebrews I had crafted. I let the players come up with their preferred backstories and concepts first, and then wrote an initial setting which supported most of what they had asked for. I gave each player pertinent background information as I fleshed out the world that essentially the players had written to start from, and then I warped things from there to build upon.

Ironically, the players all chose similar backgrounds from out in the countryside of the starting nation in the world. As a result, it's actually in character for them to know very little about the outside world, since they've been local to the region from the getgo. I even skewed the available information about the rest of the nations of the world to put them in 'legendary' terms instead of factual ones. "Legend says, the citizens of this country are all Dragonborn and eat human children for breakfast." That kind of thing. Impressions, rather than dossiers. Keeps it real, and lets them explore where they wanted to go.

Fast forward three months later and the world has really taken off, but it's all been developed along the likely lines of plot arcs and story progressions that the characters are most likely to select from. As they get closer to each decision point for branching pathways, I get a sense of which options are likely to be played through and develop those out next.

It's an interesting approach to a homebrew for me. Always before I would do up an extensive world first, and then populate it with adventures for the characters. Here I've got the character adventures done up first, and I'm extrapolating it out into a gaming world as we go. Keeps me focused where the effort will do the most good from the players' POV. A lot of newer RPG systems incorporate the players ideas into the campaign and world building.

Just some thoughts on ways to make Homebrews work for you in FG.

I think it takes more practice and more confidence to take on this approach - but if you can deliver you will prolly all have a lot of fun as you

Hey acolyte,

I'm in the same boat. I'm on GMT (an American in the UK) and like you looking to begin to dm D&D 5.0 on Fantasy Grounds. Maybe it's not a bad idea for those fairly new to FG to practise running a few sessions with like-minded potentially ready dms? That way no players looking for a dm who's totally familiar with FG and 5.0 effects etc. won't be dissappointed. Experienced dms, is this perhaps a bad idea?

BTW, it took forever to figure out how to create the banner below but I'm on my way I hope.

If you post a game and you let playrs know where you are at in terms of GM and FG they wont ahve a problem with it. There are plenty of groups that learn together in this way. Go for it - its a good learning experience.

The sig is still wrong - try this code example:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/20gyzh14croyjwq/fg-con-8-signatures.txt?dl=0