Creating a Homebrew world vs. Published Setting - which do you prefer?

[Ozreth]

So I've been struggling with whether or not to start a new campaign set in the Forgotten Realms (probably my fav setting, but havent run a game in it yet) or creating my own from scratch.

Both would be labor heavy as I am the type of guy that enjoys sitting down with a giant 3 ring binder and filling it full of notes, drawings, maps, npcs, etc etc.

The rewards of both options are equal to me. The reward of creating my own world that the players can help build, and the reward of getting to deeper explore (and exploit : p) the world I've been reading about it novels for so long. Some of my players are FR fans also, so that would be nice.

What are you thoughts on the situation? Which do you prefer and why? I know nobody can make a decision for me, but discussion always helps.

[Kiero]

I don't care as long as its good.

What definitely isn't good are crossovers of existing settings ("it's Star Wars mixed with Star Trek") or rip-offs of existing settings so that alien things can be inserted into them ("it's like Dune, only instead of sandworms, they're dragons and the Fremen are elves").

[peacenlove]

If it is a game with a linear story then i have experienced homebrew worlds to be enough to present something new to the players as a distraction from the story.

For sandbox games however the diversity of 3.5 Forgotten realms is unparalleled. If they feel like classic deathtrap adventuring send them to Durlag's Tower. Political intrigue? Try a drow city or Sembia. Mad cults rising horrors from beyond? Look no further than the Cult of the Dragon. And the list goes on.

[akma]

I always prefer to make things up myself, it makes them feel mine and makes me feel more original, and I like making stuff up.
However, objectively, I think using something published is the best. A lot less work, and you can still alter it for your needs, but it would be much easier then building it from scratch.

[dsmiles]

As a DM, I prefer to use homebrew. I don't have time to read every single (in this case) FR novel and setting book to get the fluff down. I find it's easier (and for me, more rewarding) to make up my own.

As a player, it doesn't really matter, as long as the DM is capable of getting me invested in the setting.

[Saintheart]

I think I work better with published setttings, mostly because I'm better at fill-in detail than large-scale world creation. I love dropping references to canon flora or fauna, and working within those structures.

[Mastikator]

I don't care as long as its good.

What definitely isn't good are crossovers of existing settings ("it's Star Wars mixed with Star Trek") or rip-offs of existing settings so that alien things can be inserted into them ("it's like Dune, only instead of sandworms, they're dragons and the Fremen are elves").

I agree with this post.

[Roak Star]

Of all the campaigns i've either played in or DMed (which isn't very much, i must admit), I've only had one be an actual published setting (eberron), though one of the other campaigns used EarthSea as a map, and the DM just filled the islands in with his own stuff.

I can't say which one i prefer (Published or Homebrew) but I DO think that homebrewed settings can offer more flexibility for the DM and players (in the sense that the DM can offer more opportunities to the players that may not be possible if you follow a preset setting strictly).

[Savannah]

I personally prefer to make a homebrew world for all of my campaigns. However, this is because none of the settings I've read so far have grabbed me and made me go "I have to run a game here". If I wanted to run a game in a published setting, I would probably do so instead of homebrewing the world, just because it lets me concentrate more on the details without worrying about the big picture. (However, I would be sure to tell the players that I might be changing things, as that gives me the same flexibility that homebrewing a world does.)

[Mulletmanalive]

I usually homebrew unless i can find a setting I like that none of my players know well enough to get pissy about canon.

Forgotten Realms is a "no" because I can't be bothered reading through 5-10 books to get an idea of what it's actually like in, say, Daggerdale, so that the FR biotch in my group won't start complaining that i've changed so-and-so's hairdo...

No, I'm actually not joking about that; I was using the information from the 2e guide to Faerun villains and Fzoul Chembral has a mullet in that while he has some stupid anime hair in the 3.0 book. Argument ensues.

Eberron works well because it's pretty vague about a lot of the areas in it and, for whatever reason, people don't seem to mind when I change things.

Dragonmech was similarly a winner, but that was because no-one knew very much and they were all fresh off the worm farm [literally].

[Soren Hero]

As a DM, I prefer to use homebrew. I don't have time to read every single (in this case) FR novel and setting book to get the fluff down. I find it's easier (and for me, more rewarding) to make up my own.

As a player, it doesn't really matter, as long as the DM is capable of getting me invested in the setting.

we need a like button...i prefer to make my own setting and world from scratch...its a lot of planning, drawing, hard-work and sometimes i have to make things up on the fly, but my players tend to appreciate it more...i draw from many different sources for plot-lines, evil bbeg plans and scenarios, but the villains and npcs aren't carbon-copy and cookie cutter people...i like to incorporate the players' own flaws, traits,virtues, etc into the villains, and sometimes make scenarios an almost "what if" the players were the bad guys, this is what they'd look like...more often than not, my players didn't realize this, but when they did, that look of recognition and "clever girl" comment made my day