This and encumbrance comes up now and then and I think its a feature that has faded from use in RPGs that can be a useful mechanic.

That being the need to bring along and keep track of food while adventuring, and sometimes the need to keep track of how much you are carrying.

BX had rations and encumbrance rules. But the rules on food were overall left up to the DM. Though it does present some quick and easy eules for foraging and suggestions for penalties for running out of food. AD&D though had rules for keeping track of food and the effects of running out. At least in our sessions we tracked rations and weight alot early on and then after a while allow it to fade into the background of "at this point the character knows what they are doing and we dont have to keep saying it." actions.

In Dragon Storm though tracking food and weight are integral parts of the gameplay as its mostly a wilderness travel game. In that you track food with coins or tokens. Running out of food had some penalties like being unable to refresh spent abilities or heal. but there were abilities to either forage or extend your supplies. (Werewolves in wolf form could hunt game if they took the form and the skill. That increases supplies. And one of my characters lugged around a cookpot that extended supplies.)

I think it adds a good element to especially wilderness heavy campaigns where the PCs are out and away from civilization for extended periods or doing long travels from point A to point B. Encumbrance as well I think has a very viable place as otherwise you can end up with some pretty absurd situations.

Anyone else track rations? How much? How long before you phase it into the background? How well did it go in use?

And any other RPGs besides D&D and Dragon Storm that have these sorts of rules? I know Star Frontiers introduces it as a factor in the Volturnus module and I believe Gamma World does too. (but dont have the book handy to check)

I track it.  Both things.  The players do part of the work, I do the rest.  There is a juncture at which it becomes less onerous: your party has enough hirelings to carry equipment, treasure and supplies, and also the cleric can cast Create Food and Drink, and they've collected one or two decent sized bags of holding.  But early on I do keep track of it and it works out well.  I always found it interesting to do what I call the Coinstar maneuver: the party will dump copper (obviously) for silver, silver for electrum, electrum for gold, and gold for gems, jewelry and other items as they find it.  How to track an adventuring party through my megadungeon?  Follow the trail of increasingly valued coins and discarded food detritus!

I imagine post D&D archeology would be interesting.

I don't bother to track either unless there is a specific situation which would lead to the importance of rations or encumbrance. For example, if the group has to go through a desert I might warn them that it's coming up and encourage them to supply with food and water prior to the trip. If they find a huge treasure I might tell them they have to count encumbrance so that they have to choose what they bring and what gets left behind. That kind of thing.

I do. I'm running LotFP, which has a lovely, abstracted encumbrance system.

Each item takes up a slot; every five slots after the first add +1 point of encumbrance.

0–1 Unencumbered
2 Lightly Encumbered
3 Heavily Encumbered
4 Severely Encumbered
5+ Over Encumbered

A day's rations count for one person take upon one slot.

I like all the decision making it creates, the panic it can cause -- both in planning the trip and while on the road.

I also assume retainers, pack animals and the such are required by the PCs to fulfill their desires.

Strangely, the Players have been slowly to acquire retainers in the game. I think this is a habit born from player several decades of, or starting only with (some of them are relatively young), games that are very PC focused, where the idea that you'd have an entourage and employees be part of the story is a novel idea -- and even strange.

I track everything. My players tend to pick up Survival skills (depending on the system) to help ease the inevitable environmental difficulties I'm prone to use to let people understand the conditions of a given region. After they get into the swing of things and deal with the obvious issues - I'm more lenient. I take into account PC's skills/class/background for what are assumed precautions. But basic stuff like food/water/encumbrance are things I track  because I generally do a lot of overland travel/exploration etc. in my adventures.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;935180I track it.  Both things.  The players do part of the work, I do the rest.

Same here. A long time ago we would forego food/encumbrance rules as too hard/no fun, until we realized how much more interesting the games are when you do. Presents lots of interesting choices - which is what I think games are largely about - and makes for fun situations.

Generally I do the "Let's all agree not to be pricks." Encumbrance system, which means there is one, but we only use it when one person is trying to get away with crap, most of the time eyeball is fine.  My players are pretty good about dropping shit before combat (and admitting they dropped it so there's no "I would never leave behind X in battle." horseshit.)

Supplies matter when travelling, especially if there are hirelings, porters, pack mules, etc.  The PCs want to outrun bandits with their expensive coursers and leave everything behind, sure, but they'd better know what is on those mules.

If they don't have it written down, I'll make the decision...They write it down.

I didn't use to track such things much at all. But then I played with a few GMs who did and saw that it could make the game a lot more interesting. I like the LotFP method for encumbrance and the random torch check for lighting and fuel... but food is something I keep closer track of, because it's fun when PCs end up eating strange things to stave off hunger and stat penalties.

These are a part of a broader set of issues that I think say a lot about game design in general. RPGs are really sets of related mini-games. I.e., under the umbrella of D&D there is the combat game, which you play once an encounter has happened, a searching and puzzle solving game, which you play when poking around in dungeons, etc. I think the strength of a game, over all, should be judged on how fun it is to play each of the mini-games, taken in isolation. Would you play D&D's combat system by itself (i.e., spend a short evening running a fight of some sort, and that's it)? Some people would say no, but most in the hobby would say yes. And 4E fans would say 'hell yes; that's all D&D is!'. So, that mini-game passes the test. Would you spend an evening using D&D rules to add to your castle or manage your fief? Some people would, at least using 1E or OD&D, where these things get some detailed work up. Would you devote a session to resolving a mass battle, and that's it? If you had chainmail handy you would (and you would like it; its fun). If you are playing recent editions you probably wouldn't - there just isn't the same core support for that kind of mini-game, so such things get abstracted or ignored. How about enchanting an item? Would you spend an hour or two sorting through how your wizard creates a new magic wand? I don't think you can do that in D&D (at least, there is no such 'mini-game' in the rules). But you could in Chivalry and Sorcery or The Fantasy Trip. And so forth.

So, when I hear questions about things like food and carrying capacity I ask, 'does this game have within it a 'mini game' about that subject that is so well made I would play it by itself for at least an hour?' In this case, the mini-game would have to be about travel and exploration, resolved over time scales of hours to days to weeks. If I'm playing a game that takes that subject seriously enough to provide a fun, well engineered min-game, then great - let's play it. If it is just some stupid ad hoc rules bolted onto a combat engine, then what is the point? Not many games actually provide you anything to do that makes rules about food and encumbrance worth using. But you could make a great game where these are super important. Managing resources and balancing your needs for equipment against your need for moving around are perfectly good topics for a mini-game. It's just that most designers can't be bothered to organize something like that.

Quote from: Omega;935177... Anyone else track rations? How much? How long before you phase it into the background? How well did it go in use?

And any other RPGs besides D&D and Dragon Storm that have these sorts of rules? I know Star Frontiers introduces it as a factor in the Volturnus module and I believe Gamma World does too. (but dont have the book handy to check)

I have always tracked rations and encumbrance. The Fantasy Trip and GURPS have relatively complete detailed rules for encumbrance and rations. I think it's an essential element of play, even though often it is abundantly solved. It's important to have rules and a track of what the situation is so that when shit hits fan, there are interesting relevant things to do about it. Often an organized group will invest in a wagon or two and plenty of food and water and dump loot and wounded comrades on the wagon. Or use pack animals. Someone should have appropriate skills to avoid mishaps. If you only have one person who's any good with animals or wagon driving, and they get killed, and/or then something panics the draft horse, it's time for fun as the food, loot, and the wounded guys resting on the wagon get taken for a full speed romp possibly off a cliff, or maybe a thief or brigand steals the wagon and the rest of the party is on foot. Oh shit. Who's actually carrying food or waterskins? Anyone carrying blankets or a tent? It looks like it might rain... um...

Encumbrance creates a mini-game where your ability to carry things is important, and choices about what to carry and where to carry it make a difference and don't just allow everything to be carried and looted and not lost when stuff happens, creates/limits opportunities for stealth an intrigue, etc.

Or, "well we could save time by crossing that bit of desert"... how much water do we need to carry and how much does that weigh... effects of sand on travel... all can make for interesting challenges, though it wants rules and tracking, and that's ok.

It depends on what I want to play.

Ryuutama, which is about the journey, requires food and encumbrance rules.

My home-ruled RPG has no food rules and only really minor encumbrance rules that basically boil down to answering "what is available during combat?"

Quote from: Larsdangly;935236These are a part of a broader set of issues that I think say a lot about game design in general. RPGs are really sets of related mini-games. I.e., under the umbrella of D&D there is the combat game, which you play once an encounter has happened, a searching and puzzle solving game, which you play when poking around in dungeons, etc. I think the strength of a game, over all, should be judged on how fun it is to play each of the mini-games, taken in isolation. Would you play D&D's combat system by itself (i.e., spend a short evening running a fight of some sort, and that's it)? Some people would say no, but most in the hobby would say yes. And 4E fans would say 'hell yes; that's all D&D is!'. So, that mini-game passes the test. Would you spend an evening using D&D rules to add to your castle or manage your fief? Some people would, at least using 1E or OD&D, where these things get some detailed work up. Would you devote a session to resolving a mass battle, and that's it? If you had chainmail handy you would (and you would like it; its fun). If you are playing recent editions you probably wouldn't - there just isn't the same core support for that kind of mini-game, so such things get abstracted or ignored. How about enchanting an item? Would you spend an hour or two sorting through how your wizard creates a new magic wand? I don't think you can do that in D&D (at least, there is no such 'mini-game' in the rules). But you could in Chivalry and Sorcery or The Fantasy Trip. And so forth.

So, when I hear questions about things like food and carrying capacity I ask, 'does this game have within it a 'mini game' about that subject that is so well made I would play it by itself for at least an hour?' In this case, the mini-game would have to be about travel and exploration, resolved over time scales of hours to days to weeks. If I'm playing a game that takes that subject seriously enough to provide a fun, well engineered min-game, then great - let's play it. If it is just some stupid ad hoc rules bolted onto a combat engine, then what is the point? Not many games actually provide you anything to do that makes rules about food and encumbrance worth using. But you could make a great game where these are super important. Managing resources and balancing your needs for equipment against your need for moving around are perfectly good topics for a mini-game. It's just that most designers can't be bothered to organize something like that.

That's one way to look at things...I however, like roleplaying.

So if the character has to logically make a choice whether to carry this or that, then the rules need to cover weights and encumbrance somehow.  If the character has to logically figure out how they are going to survive crossing Death Valley on foot, because that's not easy, the rules should be able to accomodate that somehow.  It doesn't have to be "isolated minigame or GTFO" that's the silliness that created Torchbearer and the world is a worse place for it.  

Just because we are agreeing it doesn't make sense that you have unlimited arrows until you or I narratively decide you don't, and we're keeping track of them, doesn't mean we need a Bowyer/Fletcher minigame.

Under what circumstances is tracking rations fun? How can you shape mechanics to give PC's the most intechoices to make?

It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.