World New or Old

[Mindscape]

When you run a fantasy game do use an already known world (Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk,...etc), do you make your own.

I used to use the Forgotten Realms since my group knew it best but lately I've switched to a custom one I made so that my player can help to shape it as they play.

[Spence]

I like to take the geography and city/town maps of an existing world and re-write the guts to my own needs. I just don't havethe time to map as much as I'd like.....

[mayapuppies]

I make mine from scratch. But soon, I'll be selling it for those that don't have the time to do the same.

[PhilFleischmann]

I use my own. It's a world I started back in the early 80's when I was playing 1st Ed AD&D. I've changed a lot of it since then, making it more consistent/"realistic", taking out parts that were lame or didn't make sense. Switching over to HERO freed me up to not have to deal with the B&D restrictions. I've added a lot of detail as well, regarding individual cities, nations, governments, cultures, calendars, languages, history, etc. I've got it pretty much where I like it now.

[Shadowsoul]

I'm not saying every GM should build a new setting when he/she comes up with a new campaign. In fact I've greatly enjoyed some campaigns carried out in standard Fantasy Hero settings.

I'm just saying that I'd get terribly bored if I tried to run something in someone else's world.

[Lawnmower Boy]

I use Earth, sometimes "alternate," sometimes not.
It makes for more immersion. Unless I'm going for a sense of the fantastic, in which case I use something as freaky as possible. So, uhm, the answer would be "other."

[tkdguy]

It really depends. Sometimes I use a ready-made world, although I may add my own touches to it. Other times I create a world from scratch.

[Old Man]

The worlds I create are mostly for my own edification. In practice I find it difficult to expect players to learn a custom setting in any detail, so I lean toward the prepackaged. Of course I am known for taking huge liberties with the published settings, partly out of creativity but partly to keep the players on their toes.

[fiducia]

I like making my own only because I play with people who know more about the previously established settings than I do. I'd much rather make things up about my world setting as I think of them or 'feel' them out than have to overthink what is 'cannon' in this and such world or not.

[Lord Fyre]

I don't have time to do all the work to create every detail of a world. I use a "canned" world, as I prefer to focus my efforts on story and character. :hush:

[teh bunneh]

I use my own. It's a world I started back in the early 80's when I was playing 1st Ed AD&D. I've changed a lot of it since then, making it more consistent/"realistic", taking out parts that were lame or didn't make sense. Switching over to HERO freed me up to not have to deal with the B&D restrictions. I've added a lot of detail as well, regarding individual cities, nations, governments, cultures, calendars, languages, history, etc. I've got it pretty much where I like it now.

Ditto what Phil said. :thumbup:

[jaws]

Done both. Though currently enjoying Arcana Evolved, Monte Cooks remake on D&D. Love it. Will probably continue to use it as a long term campaign world.

However I am working on prepping everything to run some path finder stuff. I probably wont take on the setting to run my own campaigns but will enjoy running my players through the different story arcs.

Though I am very liberal with what I do with settings once i get my hands on them.

[jaws]

I make mine from scratch. But soon, I'll be selling it for those that don't have the time to do the same.

Hopefully the poll isn't too accurate so it iwll be worth your time and effort.

[mayapuppies]

hehe, yeah, tell me about it. Sheesh. :rolleyes:

[Basil]

Switching over to HERO freed me up to not have to deal with the B&D restrictions.
:eek::eek:
the B&D restrictions.
:shock::shock:
the B&D restrictions.
:help::help:


j/k :winkgrin:

[PhilFleischmann]

:eek::eek:
:shock::shock:
:help::help:

j/k :winkgrin:
You read that correctly. B&D is what I like to call D&D, especially when refering to the *restraints* it places on players and GMs.

[Bismark]

I'm not saying every GM should build a new setting when he/she comes up with a new campaign. In fact I've greatly enjoyed some campaigns carried out in standard Fantasy Hero settings.

Brings a tear to the eye to read that (they were my campaigns in both Turakian and Valdorian ages :D).

For Fantasy I usually use pre-prepared settings (the aforementioned TA and VA, plus I have just finished a campaign in Shadow World [which went OK, although I reckon I would need another stab at it to get it the way I want it]).

I am seriously considering Forgotten Realms HERO next (playing fast and loose with the canon as I see fit, and mainly using the Horde and Kara-Tur territories to give the players something different).

Another thing I would like to do, but have not done yet, is to make quite big changes to an established setting - Valdorian Age is ripe for that, in my opinion (the Valdorian Empire as it stands sounds about as interesting to visit as watching paint dry - I need more corruption and preferably disintegration, dammit :D)

Oddly enough, for Sc-Fi I usually go the homebrew route...

[Basil]

Switching over to HERO freed me up to not have to deal with the B&D restrictions.
:eek::eek:

the B&D restrictions.
:shock::shock:

the B&D restrictions.
:help::help:



j/k :winkgrin:
You read that correctly. B&D is what I like to call D&D, especially when refering to the *restraints* it places on players and GMs.

Ah, but the difference is that in B&D the particpants like the *restraints*, while...

Um...


nevermind :whip:

[Nolgroth]

I do both. I am presently trying to cobble together a world setting, but my real strength lies in taking the foundations that others have laid and building upon them. I love the maps to Forgotten Realms and I have a lot of them.

[Silverhawk]

I like to have my own world but I always find something in someone else's that will allow me to throw some interesting curves at the players.
:eg:

[Markdoc]

Ditto what Phil said. :thumbup:

I'm a dittohead too: that's pretty much what I did.

cheers, Mark

[Blue Jogger]

I actually went and built into the campaign premise that the world was being rebuilt from when magic went away, plunging the world into another Dark Age and this is the second generation since magic has come back.

It solved a lot of problems. When talking about the past, I could pull from everyone's AD&D nostalgia.

[Curufea]

Most written settings I've ever seen seem to be based on the worst parts of literature that inspired them with added combat stats. The combat stats are the least important part to me, so I tend to create them based on literature instead of published settings.

[Pokep]

I fell in love with Harn 25 years ago. It remains the gold standard, IMHO. Nothing else comes close for completeness and verisimilitude, and you can play it at any level from highest to lowest fantasy.

[Curufea]

I fell in love with Harn 25 years ago. It remains the gold standard, IMHO. Nothing else comes close for completeness and verisimilitude, and you can play it at any level from highest to lowest fantasy.

Ah, I'd forgotten about Harn. I do own it, although I haven't used it as a setting yet. It is the exception to the rule and actually very decent indeed.

[tkdguy]

I've been dying to start a Middle-earth campaign for a while now. However, I'd like to resurrect my nonmagical fantasy campaign as well.

My problem is, I enjoy creating campaign settings, but my tastes in fantasy and science fiction tend to be different from the mainstream. I often do away with several things common to the genre and add other stuff. It doesn't always go well with the players.