bad homebrew? If you decide later that this thing they brought is no good and needs to go, how are they likely to react to that? Do you trust them to have evaluated it? Are they pretty knowledgeable about what's reasonable and not? How much do you trust their opinion of good v.s. If you are auditing material a player has brought you, which is the time-limited situation I most often find myself in with regards to evaluating homebrew, consider most the reputation of the person bringing you the thing. If you don't have time or energy to read through the whole thing, focus on the sections that are most relevant to your game (1st-5th level abilities for classes most likely, entry abilities and one-tier-up abilities for subclasses, the first hour's worth of material and the main baddies/locations/cool things for a campaign, etc). If the material contradicts itself or refers you to tables or statblocks that don't exist, that's a very bad sign.
If said feat didn't acknowledge that anywhere, that would be a serious problem.įor longer material, look for contradictions or serious omissions. For example, a feat that (in part) gave you the ability to use an Action to increase your attack range with the Attack action for the rest of your turn would be usable only by fighters currently using their action surge.
Can those conditions actually arise? If not, or if they are extremely complicated to create and the material doesn't outline that, that's a problem. Is the homebrew vastly more expensive than preexisting options? If so, that's a problem.įor functionality, the quick test I use depends on if it's longer material like a class or subclass or campaign, or shorter material like a race or feat or magic item.įor shorter material, look at the conditions you need to be in to use the homebrew material. If not, then look at other things with similarish effects. Is it vastly more than other stuff of the same resource cost? If so that's a problem. Smell TestĪnother important test that applies primarily to homebrew material you want to integrate into a fairly 'normal' campaign is a very rough check for balance and functionality.įor balance, look at the stuff the homebrew gives you. Look out in particular for any rules that explicitly call out DM discretion or judgement calls without any advice or direction as to how said determinations are to be made- this is a common shortcut used by inexperienced authors, especially with untested material, to avoid having to think about the consequences and/or details of a system.
Imprecise and thoughtless language around mechanical bits is a good indication that the homebrew material is not going to go well in your game without a lot of work. People often echo the style of first-party material, but the degree to which they do so and the elements of style they pick up on vary. One of the best ways I've found to tell if homebrew is going to be a lot of work is to pay attention to the style of language used in feature descriptions it provides.
On the other hand, if you find something that doesn't work, you may want to approach future work from that source with a jaundiced eye, especially if your objections are stylistic rather than technical. Furthermore, the skills involved develop over time, so you're more likely to have less problems with newer material by your favorite artist than the first thing they ever tried to make. There are several general metrics you can use to help evaluate homebrew quickly, though none are perfect: ReputationĬreating homebrew is an art, so if you find something you really like it's likely you'll similarly enjoy other work by the same author.
0 kommentar(er)
