TheRPGSite

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! :D

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. :D

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. :D

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.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935265It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.

Right. Like ammunition, fuel, energy shields, etc. that tend to fail at dramatically opportune moments.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935265It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.

While this is just Shawn being Shawn, it does bring up a good point:

I use encumbrance rules and tracking food in some games I run, and not others.

In my LotFP game (B/X D&D)? Yes. The game was built with this in mind, and in my view better served by bringing it into play.

If I'm running King Arthur Pendragon? No. It's assumed the knight has his "knight stuff" and his squire has more "knight stuff" and as they adventure, they'll have what they need, because tracking food ain't a knight thing.

If I'm running Burning Wheel, if it looks like food might be an issue, then we make a Resource test and fight out if this is going to be an issue. If it isn't, it isn't; and if it is, it is -- and that becomes a new problem for the PCs to deal with as other issues are raining down on them.

Different RPGs are different (which is good!) and provided different play experiences. My answer to the OP on previous page was in the context of the LotFP game I am currently running. But not all RPGs in general.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935258That's one way to look at things...I however, like roleplaying. :D

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.

My guess is you play games that have detailed combat rules, with turns and actions and movement rates and all that crap. Why do you bother with that? Don't they mess with your roleplaying freedumz?

Last weekend, playing pendragon, an NPC squire holding a mace told his PC knight boss "sir, if you insist on carrying anymore weapons I am going to have to ask you to bend over.  There is no place else to put it."  That's about the extent of my use of encumbrance rules - be reasonable, and I won't make you track it or penalize you for it.

I will bring up encumbrance under certain common sense situations, swimming in armor, or trying to jump a chasm carrying 100 lbs of gold.

I prefer very generous rules for food and encumbrance (food is cheap and lightweight, horses eat grass, you can carry a lot of stuff etc), however I do expect players to keep track of it.
Every now and then I grab a character sheet and check  encumbrance.  If above the characters limit, then obviously he have dropped stuff so I pick some things and erase it.
Perhaps  I should encourage them by giving a bonus (Xp, heropoint) when they´ve kept the limit?
Bloggers challenge: "The overload consquence chart" - like: 1: Dropped 1d6 objects; 2:Pack breaks, everything falls on the floor...

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935265It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;935269Right. Like ammunition, fuel, energy shields, etc. that tend to fail at dramatically opportune moments.

That's one option for "fumble" rolls in my game. You've run out of ammo and reloads or your weapon jammed (terminology: "jam" means you need an armorer to make it work, a "stoppage" can be fixed during combat) so you need something else until combat is done.

I love Oregon Trail D&D but often am lazy about tracking stuff in actual play.

Am planning to making food matter more by making it a very Bad Idea to eat food in most adventuring locations. See Persephone in Hades.

Quote from: Ashakyre;935264Under what circumstances is tracking rations fun? How can you shape mechanics to give PC's the most intechoices to make?

Survival horror in the wilderness. Nature as the enemy. Bad weather, starvation, dehydration, not enough arrows and lack of proper supplies in the wild can lead to interesting outcomes... like being unable to forage for meat, and having to resort to eating your enemies. :D

Oregon Trail: Grim & Perilous!

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935265It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.

Except for the ones that do.

Quote from: Omega;935290Except for the ones that do.

If it is tracked in movies and books, then that is what the movie or book is about. Is that what your campaign is about? Sounds like you ran out of talent as a GM to even be asking about tracking food/ammo and encumbrance.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935292If it is tracked in movies and books, then that is what the movie or book is about. Is that what your campaign is about?

Poor attempt at analogy. But to play along with your troll: ammo or supplies in books or movies isn't "what the movie or book is about". We call those "sub-plots", "complications" or "conflicts". They make life more challenging for the protagonist. Y'know, the character(s) that the book or movie is about.

But games aren't books or movies. If they were, they'd be books or movies, not books or movies about games. :)

QuoteSounds like you ran out of talent as a GM to even be asking about tracking food/ammo and encumbrance.

Troll better next time.

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

I do. I use a simpler encumbrance system; "stone weight" compared to < 1/2 STR, > 1/2 STR, < 2x STR. You can carry a little bit of stuff and be agile, a moderate amount and soldier along, or a crap-ton and stagger like a drunk tortoise.

A week of preserved food is one stone. A week of fresh food is 3. The better your food and rest the faster you heal up and resist disease or poison. I figure that if I'm going to make you keep track of food, there had better be something in it for you beyond a tic-box.

It's actually sort of lame that there are hardly any games worth mentioning that seriously consider how you will play out something like climbing to the top of the world's greatest mountain, or crossing the fire-blast swamps or whatever. What do they really provide? An encounter table and a number of hexes per day you can move?. The D&D 1E Wilderness guide takes a stab at this stuff, but is surprisingly unplayable - it reads like a bunch of crap someone got paid to write but that even the author never bothered to play. To re-iterate, the only way to approach this in a way that gets you somewhere is to ask, what would it look like if I made a game about summiting a mountain, that is actually fun and challenging, and that can be resolved in ~15 minutes of play? And then just prod the rules a bit so they use the stats and mechanics of whatever core system you are running.

Real original OD&D understood this. It's why they recommended you go get a board game about traveling through the wilderness as part of your play equipment. Actually, OD&D had an interesting approach to this whole idea of 'sub games': they said, go get Chainmail to deal with fights (plus some add-ons we'll provide here); go get a board game (something sort of like Wilderness, except I can't remember the name) to play out overland travel, and D&D's job is to stitch these sub-games together with a broader context and more detailed treatment of characters.

And the first person to say 'oh, I just make that stuff up on the spot, like any sane person would' can douse him or herself in gasoline and light a match. That is why our games are such rubbish when it comes to this sort of play.

Edit: The old game was 'Outdoor Survival'

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Moving on . . .

Have any of you gone camping?

Or a picnic?

Food and water is heavy. Bulky as fuck. Requires containers. Goes bad easy.

And you die without it.

If the PCs are leaving civilization, I expect them to be prepared, but I deal with it in abstract. Moreover, I am most interested in how the heavy, bulky food and water for X days is going to be carted about, especially when we head into danger.

In my OD&D game and most of my others, I assume competency in survival skills among non-nobles. Thus, unless you're a Noble, you know shit about hunting, skinning, cooking, and all the necessary outdoor skills that wanderers in the Dark Ages knew. Nobles know more important shit, like being born noble and having a name worth repeating.

Coincidentally or not, I have written two single, separate pages to insert in B/X (http://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com.br/2016/03/one-page-rules-or-taking-page-from.html) (my plan is to write 64+, but it might take a while); one deals with food (and water, hazards, etc) and other with encumbrance and movement.

This one-page thing is the most I'm willing to read to deal with encumbrance and food; The Wilderness Survival Guide is just too much for my tastes.

Quote from: Larsdangly;935273My guess is you play games that have detailed combat rules, with turns and actions and movement rates and all that crap. Why do you bother with that? Don't they mess with your roleplaying freedumz?

Aw how cute.  Why not just sit in a circle and diddle each other's happy bits if all you care about is FUNZ without any actual relation to the setting the characters are inhabiting.  Go live in Japan, I hear suckshops are $20some bucks for two cumshots.

Or, we can actually talk...

Quote from: Larsdangly;935296It's actually sort of lame that there are hardly any games worth mentioning that seriously consider how you will play out something like climbing to the top of the world's greatest mountain, or crossing the fire-blast swamps or whatever. What do they really provide? An encounter table and a number of hexes per day you can move?. The D&D 1E Wilderness guide takes a stab at this stuff, but is surprisingly unplayable - it reads like a bunch of crap someone got paid to write but that even the author never bothered to play. To re-iterate, the only way to approach this in a way that gets you somewhere is to ask, what would it look like if I made a game about summiting a mountain, that is actually fun and challenging, and that can be resolved in ~15 minutes of play? And then just prod the rules a bit so they use the stats and mechanics of whatever core system you are running.

Real original OD&D understood this. It's why they recommended you go get a board game about traveling through the wilderness as part of your play equipment. Actually, OD&D had an interesting approach to this whole idea of 'sub games': they said, go get Chainmail to deal with fights (plus some add-ons we'll provide here); go get a board game (something sort of like Wilderness, except I can't remember the name) to play out overland travel, and D&D's job is to stitch these sub-games together with a broader context and more detailed treatment of characters.

And the first person to say 'oh, I just make that stuff up on the spot, like any sane person would' can douse him or herself in gasoline and light a match. That is why our games are such rubbish when it comes to this sort of play.

Edit: The old game was 'Outdoor Survival'

Eh, you kind of have a point with minigames.  Aces and Eights has a bunch of minigames...  
Cattle Drive - minigame.  
Mining or Panning - minigame.
Barfight - minigame.
Horse Chase - minigame.
Jury Trial - minigame.
...and they're awesome.

But, encumbrance, rations, ammunition have meaning outside of an "Overland Travel" minigame.  The alarm gets raised and the PCs have to bag out the window of the palace with the strongest carrying the Sultan's latest slave (who is the daughter of the priest who hired the PCs) over his shoulder...how much loot can the rest carry?  It's simple physics and math, there's no need for a "3 seconds to loot" minigame.  How many hand crossbow bolts can a thief carry and hide, and still have full mobility?  That matters when the Thief gets into a running rooftop fight, or gets cornered in an alley without a "Running Rooftop Fight" minigame or "Death Alley Archer" minigame.

I'll give you that entertaining minigames can work.  That they are necessarily the best way to deal with simple questions like "how many times can I fire my bow" or "how many coins can I carry" or "how many days before I starve" is silly.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935337Aw how cute.  Why not just sit in a circle and diddle each other's happy bits if all you care about is FUNZ without any actual relation to the setting the characters are inhabiting.  Go live in Japan, I hear suckshops are $20some bucks for two cumshots.

Or, we can actually talk...


...

You are a useless sack of shit.

Quote from: finarvyn;935185I 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'm the same. Dont think I've ever tracked food, esp with Create Food & Water spells available. Plus bags of holding/portable holes = dont worry about encumbrance. On the other hand, I am (these days) much more interested in low magic games - and I think that's where rations/encumbrance could get meaningful again

Quote from: CRKrueger;935337Why not just sit in a circle and diddle each other's happy bits if all you care about is FUNZ

That sounds way more fun than tracking encumbrance!!

Quote from: Spinachcat;935362That sounds way more fun than tracking encumbrance!!

Gives a new meaning to "mini" game.

Quote from: Spinachcat;935322Have any of you gone camping?

Or a picnic?

Food and water is heavy. Bulky as fuck. Requires containers. Goes bad easy.

And you die without it.

People who don't camp/haven't had to haul their own water have no idea how heavy and what a pain in the ass it is.

The trade-off between water and other stuff you need is real, let alone stuff you want (boom box, favorite book, Jewels of Gwahlur, etc) and is compounded when you have to worry about fighting or running away at any moment.

I always liked this blog post when it came to tracking food and water in D&D: http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/7632/roleplaying-games/the-subtle-shifts-in-play

Quote from: Larsdangly;935273My guess is you play games that have detailed combat rules, with turns and actions and movement rates and all that crap. Why do you bother with that? Don't they mess with your roleplaying freedumz?

Dishes it out...

Quote from: Larsdangly;935353You are a useless sack of shit.

...can't take it. Unsurprising.

Quote from: Spinachcat;935362That sounds way more fun than tracking encumbrance!!

In Dragon Storm each characters carrying capacity is listed right on the card and each item has its weight listed.
So the bog standard Human has a CAP of 7. +3 when in dragon form. A javelin is listed as CAP -1. A Helmet or some robes is CAP -1 if not worn. In 10 years of heavy convention play no one ever had trouble with tracking food, water or encumbrance.

Much the same in say BX. Long as you know your limit and the weights its usually just some simple math at the start of an adventure and then usually some more at the end as you try to figure out the logistics of getting all this gold coin or other sellables back.

The only time I'd track food is in a bleak setting where supplies might be scarce or tainted. Like, post-apocalyptic. I was considering running Sine Nomine's Other Dust at one point, and would definitely leverage its mechanics for food supplies, food deprivation, and tainted food.

I'm also a fan of a "prickless" encumbrance system. Nothing too detailed - abstract, mutually-agreed upon by the group.

I track them.

I expect the party to treat exploration with forethought and real danger. It makes things more strategic. Especially in the more extreme weather locales, as more 'forgotten' treasure would linger there unmolested from incapable tomb raider teams. It's a challenge and a real world coherent logic as to why some fallen empire stuff hasn't been looted and rediscovered wholesale, down to the flagstones.

Now, if they want to travel without thinking about them, I have a lot of caravans that need guarding. Fuck up in your job too much and watch your caravan master "be cruel" and either shrink rations, shorten rests, or dump gear and people in an effort to survive a nasty leg. Fight them on such decisions and face ostracism to the wilds, and then press your luck about the "uselessness" of bean counting.

Hey, if you wanna be smart and hire a cart and some hirelings, maybe even a caravan master, I will gladly "abstract" your bean counting work to my side of the GM Screen, (for a percentage bump to your team hirelings,)!

Keep your travel legs small and hug the slices of civilization and you'll rarely have to worry about it. Delegate it to others for a fee, and the authority to manage it right, same, no worries. Go in half-cocked and expect no consequences? Not my table. After you are done whinging and crying, please leave and thank you.

Quote from: Ashakyre;935264Under what circumstances is tracking rations fun? How can you shape mechanics to give PC's the most intechoices to make?

For me, games are fun when they are about a subject that interests me (which does include managing travel and logistical details, sometimes) , and when the rules reflect logical cause & effect in those situations, so that players can experience the same types of choices that would actually occur in a situation.

So it's fun for me any time there are choices to make that matter, and it's fun for me when there are ways to invest & organize so that those details are often not a problem, and it's especially fun for me when there are interesting potential effects to deal with in logical ways when other events cause complications. Like when the group gets separated, and suddenly it matters who is carrying what. Or when someone suddenly has to climb or swim or fight, and suddenly it matters where they are carrying things and what they're wearing. Or when something messes with their logistical solution, or circumstances dramatically change, and suddenly there is a new situation and problem that naturally flows from a combination of what the situation is, their choices before and after some new developments, and the rules that provide logical systems for how stuff works. I find it fun to have rules and track stuff so that situations can naturally develop from events, and so players realize they are responsible for anticipating and being prepared and making smart choices or they may suffer logical consequences because it's part of the game system (as opposed to the GM just deciding it would be cool if some supply situation happens and just makes that up and how it affects stuff or what choices it brings up that he just invented as an intentionally designed story situation).

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935265It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.

Huh? In books and movies about situations where it matters, it is either tracked, or the story is lazy, forced, fake and/or lame.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;935269Right. Like ammunition, fuel, energy shields, etc. that tend to fail at dramatically opportune moments.

Which tends to be pretty transparently forced, lame and annoying, and causes me to lose interest and feel the authors are lazy and/or lame.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935337But, encumbrance, rations, ammunition have meaning outside of an "Overland Travel" minigame.  The alarm gets raised and the PCs have to bag out the window of the palace with the strongest carrying the Sultan's latest slave (who is the daughter of the priest who hired the PCs) over his shoulder...how much loot can the rest carry?  It's simple physics and math, there's no need for a "3 seconds to loot" minigame.  How many hand crossbow bolts can a thief carry and hide, and still have full mobility?  That matters when the Thief gets into a running rooftop fight, or gets cornered in an alley without a "Running Rooftop Fight" minigame or "Death Alley Archer" minigame.

Agreed.

The thing is, there is bookkeeping and attention that needs to be paid for these things to pay off. Some people don't think that attention is worth the payoff. I have seen that while it does take time and focus on occasion, it often leads to terrific pay off in unexpected way outside of the resource manage tracking and how that resource management affects the decisions of the PCs and the plight. For me, the time put into tracking this stuff pays off, creating dramatic moments and heightening dramatic moments.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935292If it is tracked in movies and books, then that is what the movie or book is about. Is that what your campaign is about? Sounds like you ran out of talent as a GM to even be asking about tracking food/ammo and encumbrance.

That's not all that the book needs to be about, just because it tracks it.

For example, Tolkien gets into what the travelers (hobbits, dwarves, orcs) have to eat sometimes in quite a bit of detail, as I recall, as well as its effects on their physical and mental state and what they decide to do about it. Seems to me there were some other topics covered.

Though if I take your "it" as "the game situation in its various details and how they logically interrelate" then yes, I track that and that's what my game is largely about. It's not generally about fantasizing that you don't have to eat or that you have infinite ammo or that you can carry twelve full-size weapons at once.

Quote from: Larsdangly;935296It's actually sort of lame that there are hardly any games worth mentioning that seriously consider how you will play out something like climbing to the top of the world's greatest mountain, or crossing the fire-blast swamps or whatever. What do they really provide? An encounter table and a number of hexes per day you can move?. The D&D 1E Wilderness guide takes a stab at this stuff, but is surprisingly unplayable - it reads like a bunch of crap someone got paid to write but that even the author never bothered to play. To re-iterate, the only way to approach this in a way that gets you somewhere is to ask, what would it look like if I made a game about summiting a mountain, that is actually fun and challenging, and that can be resolved in ~15 minutes of play? And then just prod the rules a bit so they use the stats and mechanics of whatever core system you are running.

See the olde Gamelords generic (Traveler) supplement The Mountain Environment.

Quote from: Spinachcat;935322Have any of you gone camping?

Or a picnic?

Food and water is heavy. Bulky as fuck. Requires containers. Goes bad easy.

And you die without it.

If the PCs are leaving civilization, I expect them to be prepared, but I deal with it in abstract. Moreover, I am most interested in how the heavy, bulky food and water for X days is going to be carted about, especially when we head into danger.

Exactly. Also try hiking around off trail in various terrain. It can be very non-trivial, and multiply the difficulty of carrying stuff. Wagons have trouble on sand, mud, rocks, steep slopes, underbrush, rocky fords, foot bridges...

Quote from: Daztur;935366I always liked this blog post when it came to tracking food and water in D&D: http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/7632/roleplaying-games/the-subtle-shifts-in-play

Great post! I use exposure rules for the same reason, they are even better than food in that aspect - "it is too cold, let us hide into a cave until the storm gets better"!

Quote from: ZWEIHÄNDER;935288Survival horror in the wilderness. Nature as the enemy. Bad weather, starvation, dehydration, not enough arrows and lack of proper supplies in the wild can lead to interesting outcomes... like being unable to forage for meat, and having to resort to eating your enemies. :D

Oregon Trail: Grim & Perilous!

Your M4A3E8 has only 4 HVAP shells and you won't be able to resupply for two days.

Wargames pretty much are ALL 'survival games'.

Quote from: Skarg;935461Huh? In books and movies about situations where it matters, it is either tracked, or the story is lazy, forced, fake and/or lame.

Games aren't books and movies, either, and somebody should have pointed that out to Laughing Boy earlier.

It depends on the game. Older D&D is partially about resource management and doing this stuff is part of the fun

when I  run   Urban Fantasy, Angel and Buffy typically , no need to bother as the PC's can just swing by Double Meat Palace for a bite to eat and I don't have enough firefights to merit tracking ammo in depth

In newer (3 and up) D&D create water is a cantrip so no need to track that  and so is purify food and water  and after 5th level or so, no need to track food either if there is a cleric in the party or a druid of nearly any level as Goodberry average 5 magic berries per casting

Right. In an urban setting the PCs (probably) dont have to worry about food. But they will still have to manage what they carry.

As for spells and such. Spells may fail and clerics in particular may be subject to the whims of the gods. Especially if they have been overusing those spells. And of course interference from other gods either direct or indirect. Or the spell it simply not in the setting.

From what I was told by TSR staff near the end was that the shift of supply spells to earlier levels was some sort of push away from having to rely on retainers and rations. You really see that by 3rd ed all the way to 5e. Though 5th has at least returned retainers as an option. Supply spells are still way too common. This was one of my playtest complaints along with the overpower of combat spells.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;935494Games aren't books and movies, either, and somebody should have pointed that out to Laughing Boy earlier.

:confused:

Quote from: Black Vulmea;935321

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;935294But games aren't books or movies.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;935265It's not tracked in books or movies. So no.

Quote from: Skarg;935461Huh? In books and movies about situations where it matters, it is either tracked, or the story is lazy, forced, fake and/or lame.

Q.E.D., BV.  Weren't referring to you.

But yeah, it HAD been pointed it out, apparently just ignored.

How the fuck did I miss that first time through?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;935524How the fuck did I miss that first time through?

I'm just too subtle for my own good, I guess.

I track both, but it generally doesn't get to be too difficult as my players usually come from a background and know what's reasonable to carry an what is not, and the importance of food and water.  It only becomes and issue when you get someone who has never really had to carry a pack full of stuff for any distance, or has never really gone without water or food, especially under physical exertion.   Water is foremost, food, well if you run out you can always eat the monsters (well at least some of them) :)

One thing I've never seen is how being real hungry can make you mean, I think you should get a bonus to saves against fear and the like when your real hungry.

It goes well, Encumbrance especially when players start trying to figure how to get all the treasure out.  I've never seen players more creative.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;935187I 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 use something similar: Every STR point equals the number of items carried; OR when the STR score is multiplied by 10, the maximum weight that can be carried while still moving and functioning (heavier loads are allowed for short distances, like using a fireman's carry on a fallen comrade). Rations and water for one day equal 10# (or one item). Regular food and drink are up to twice as heavy, and will spoil quickly but are cheaper and usually easier to obtain in one form or another.

Now, for the typical adventure where the PCs are only a few days away from home base, I don't bother to keep up with tracking rations. But lengthy expeditions -especially ones at sea or in the barren wilderness- do require keeping track of food and drink. One reason I started using this stripped-down method is that as a player and DM in games where keeping tabs on food, drink and other supplies was mandatory, the PCs made it a point to pillage every scrap of food, every drop of water/wine/beer, everything that could burn and every piece of material that could be used to make improvised gunny sacks. They turned sacking and looting into an art form and it started taking up more time during the sessions than I wanted.

I don't fuss over it too much. I mean, my GPs are not 1/10th of a pound so things don't get too crazy, and generally parties go into the dungeon for the day and withdraw to a little camp at night.

I love the survival stuff in computer games - I play "survival" difficulty in Fallout 4 - but it's tedious in tabletop stuff. I've done it once or twice but it was a postapocalyptic game and one-on-one, you don't have other players' discussions and arguments to slow you down so putting in more complications in other areas is okay.

In my Land of Ice and Stone supplement for Legend, food is of prime importance. It is set in the Old Stone Age and has rules for tracking food consumption as many PCs are on the edge of starvation. A post-apocalyptic game might have similar requirements.

Most games don't need this level of detail, however. If I play a fighter in a D&D game, I can shoot some game and roast it on a fire. Alternatively, I can go to a tavern and get a cheap meal, unless I have absolutely no money and nothing to trade for food, in which case the next scenario is about getting money to buy food.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935337Aw how cute.  Why not just sit in a circle and diddle each other's happy bits if all you care about is FUNZ without any actual relation to the setting the characters are inhabiting.  Go live in Japan, I hear suckshops are $20some bucks for two cumshots.

Quote from: LarsdanglyYou are a useless sack of shit.

A discussion of food and encumbrance in rpgs has led to two guys angrily abusing each-other.

I do love a good session of shaking my fist in righteous nerdfury. Keep it up, lads!

My issue is food and water is heavy and requires storage. If you are not bringing a supply wagon, you need a train of mules. That's why Drive Cart is a skill in Warhammer. Carts are the medieval pickup truck.

I agree with Opa on the packmaster concept. If the PCs don't want to deal with the supply aspect of adventuring, they can hire people who will do it for them. For me, that's a fine way to handle abstraction.
In fact, there would probably be a Guild who supplies exploration ventures in game worlds where adventurers were a thing.

Hmm...that's also a good way to suck money off PCs too.

Quote from: Spinachcat;935852My issue is food and water is heavy and requires storage. If you are not bringing a supply wagon, you need a train of mules. That's why Drive Cart is a skill in Warhammer. Carts are the medieval pickup truck.

I agree with Opa on the packmaster concept. If the PCs don't want to deal with the supply aspect of adventuring, they can hire people who will do it for them. For me, that's a fine way to handle abstraction.
In fact, there would probably be a Guild who supplies exploration ventures in game worlds where adventurers were a thing.

Hmm...that's also a good way to suck money off PCs too.

In our world deep exploration -- unless funded through trade along the way -- habitually needs upfront investment on speculation, from our ancient past to present. Anything from government, mafiosi, trade guilds, religions, scientists, etc. can be used because they've all been well known ideas in our real world. It's extremely easy to create a coherent setting justification for this in a low frequency magic setting.

I could easily see the party's in-town adventures in trying to get expedition sponsorship alone. :D

(If you're really evil, and the players are up for a challenge, you could make them part-time ad hoc traders, reluctant evangelists, or even walking sponsor advertisements... all well established ideas as of now in reality.)
:p

This is why my characters tend to buy a caravan style wagon home ASAP and stock up on foods that wont go bad anytime soon. At least four players I've known had goals of getting a ship for much the same reason. A mobile base to carry supplies.

Water is the big weight issue. But with a well distributed backpack its not so much an issue. Getting a super-science dimensional backpack was one of my Gamma World characters early goals and most valued item afterwards.

Quote from: soltakss;935752In my Land of Ice and Stone supplement for Legend, food is of prime importance. It is set in the Old Stone Age

You had me at Mammoths. Purchased.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935897You had me at Mammoths. Purchased.

Remember, not all mammoths were woolly mammoths. :) Even 65 million years ago, Texas was too hot for that.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;935844A discussion of food and encumbrance in rpgs has led to two guys angrily abusing each-other.

I do love a good session of shaking my fist in righteous nerdfury. Keep it up, lads!

(http://i.giphy.com/GjYjLvGErsggg.gif)

I like the IDEA of encumbrance, but how do you do it in 5th edition and actually track it without it being a huge hassle?

Even just looting a corpse becomes a big science project as you have to compare the weights of each new item against what you currently have.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936111I like the IDEA of encumbrance, but how do you do it in 5th edition and actually track it without it being a huge hassle?

Even just looting a corpse becomes a big science project as you have to compare the weights of each new item against what you currently have.

Not much worse than juggling spells. The main thing is that it usually doesnt happen often enough to be onerous. That was the trick in Dragon Storm and BX. You just ticked off a unit of supply each day of travel or every seven days or whatever works. Same with encumberance. You usually dont see it come into play again till the end of an adventure.

But this is also part of why phasing out retainers and hirelings was a bad idea as it introduced this logistics problem. Players wanting to haul stull back with 4 people that before took a dozen or more.

In 5e your carrying capacity in pounds is STR x 15. 50 coins weighs 1 pound. A longsword weighs 3lb. So fairly easy to frontload your capacity and then note the initial adventuring weight during chargen. After that it doesnt factor for a while usually. (usually)

Quick rundown with my Warlock.
Step 1: STR 16 = capacity of 240. Encumbered at 80. Heavily encumbered at 160.
Step 2: Shield = 6lb.(technically weighs nothing once attuned) Leather armour = 10lb. Clothes = 6lb. Waterskin = 5lb, 10 iron spikes = 5lb. 3 flasks of(lantern)oil = 3lb. Lantern = 2lb. 50ft of Rope = 10lb. Backpack = 5lb.
Step 3: Total 52 out of my 240 = 28 till encumbered and 102 till heavily and a max of 188 left.

So I find a chest with 1000 silver in it? Thats 20lb. How hard is that to parse out what to drop or not?

Quote from: Omega;936113How hard is that to parse out what to drop or not?

You...you...you did like Math, like actual numbers and stuff, like from 3rd Grade, but you actually were capable of it still...and these items...you kept track of them...as if those items were...real and actually existed to your character...and your character actually thought of things that people in books never do...

(http://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/mind-blown-meme-pie.jpg)

BX D&D was really easy since everyone had the exact same carrying capacity. And they gave a general adventuring gear weight too. 1600 coin was the max (160lb) which even a STR 3 character can carry. Adventuring gear was 80 coin (8lb) Since my magic user was had the lightest gear requirements usually I ended up the spare pack mule. (Literally if I had Polymorph self handy...)

Well, we've had the expected pissing matches, the obligatory real-world comparison, and some one-true-wayism. No surprise. Keep up the good work. The only thing I'll contest is from the OP:

Quote from: Omega;935177This 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.

Really? I know "there's nothing new under the sun" is part of my schtick, but I'm curious. Why do you think this? Just within D&D/OSR, I see rations, encumbrance rules, and wilderness/survival mechanics in every edition I can pull off my shelf. Likewise, not just whether the rules are available, but whether people bothered, I think it was "it depends" back in the day (my own back in the day not as far back as some here) and "it depends" now. Do you have any games specifically in mind when you say this?


Anyways, my answer: If you and your group consider resource management to be an interesting facet of the game, you utilize that functionality. If not, then you tend to hand-wave it (especially once you hit the point where rations and pack animals/henchmen become relatively cheap compared to your income). There are some games where ignoring the resource management side changes the game significantly (not having to defend the henchmen and mules does make life easier, encumbrance changes combat statistics), but a lot of them, the rest of the game flows the same, in which case it should simply be a group choice on whether it is fun and no further judgment should be cast.

The only game I can think of off the top of my head where managing food is effectively required, or else it fundamentally upsets the rest of the game, would be Vampire: the Masquerade. :p

We follow CRKruger's don't be a dick policy but I will do spot audits from time to time to keep the players honest.

When I am running games I dont care to keep close track on such things. Exception would be some D&D/OSR games but nowdays I mostly handle it "you got a bag of holding with 3 weeks iron rations per PC and a bottle with a portal to the elemental plane if water (pure water) that keeps refilling itself." I do enjoy the resource mini-game myself as a player in old D&D, but my players dont and I dont care as much to really force the issue.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;936229Really? I know "there's nothing new under the sun" is part of my schtick, but I'm curious. Why do you think this? Just within D&D/OSR, I see rations, encumbrance rules, and wilderness/survival mechanics in every edition I can pull off my shelf. Likewise, not just whether the rules are available, but whether people bothered, I think it was "it depends" back in the day (my own back in the day not as far back as some here) and "it depends" now. Do you have any games specifically in mind when you say this?

Around 2e D&D is when youd see a greater shift away from having retainers and keeping track of supplies and weights. Though to be fair it wasnt exactly heavily emphasized either in previous editions. The rules were there. But over time the use importance of them fell by the wayside. As noted previously. According to TSR staff I talked to part of the reason was players were writing in or at cons about not liking the logistics side and not wanting to deal with retainers and henchmen. I get the feeling some on the staff agreed. I know for a fact others disagreed. Tracking food was the first that seemed to phase out. Then retainers. Encumbrance hangs in there at least in D&D and other games. But sometimes it feels like its importance has faded. YMMV of course.

So emphasis on it and prevalence of it being a big thing? Yes, definitely. The whole resource management game was very much more prevalent the farther back you go. You can still do it with editions after it, though.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;936293So emphasis on it and prevalence of it being a big thing? Yes, definitely. The whole resource management game was very much more prevalent the farther back you go. You can still do it with editions after it, though.

I dont think anyones said that its been removed. Just that the emphasis has shifted away and its been diminished, sometimes nearly removed. Though to be fair some of its just been moved to "The characters are smart enough to be doing this stuff in the background/downtime without having to micromanage it all." Which is ok with me. Kind of like how for example older editions of D&D assumed the characters were naturally testing for traps as they go automatically. Which is a bit funny as over the years that aspects had more micromanaging added.

I believe we should add some realism that captures the difficulty of supplying an expedition.  An army may march on its stomach but a GM runs on his beer.   When the GM is out of beer the party is out of water.  Penalties shall ensue that will make the players see the realistic damage system as kind, even lover like treatment.  YMMV as your beverage of choice. :)

Quote from: Xanther;936360I believe we should add some realism that captures the difficulty of supplying an expedition.  An army may march on its stomach but a GM runs on his beer.   When the GM is out of beer the party is out of water.  Penalties shall ensue that will make the players see the realistic damage system as kind, even lover like treatment.  YMMV as your beverage of choice. :)

Reminds me, I need a beer.

Quote from: Xanther;936360I believe we should add some realism that captures the difficulty of supplying an expedition.  An army may march on its stomach but a GM runs on his beer.   When the GM is out of beer the party is out of water.  Penalties shall ensue that will make the players see the realistic damage system as kind, even lover like treatment.

So it is written. So let it be done.

That's just a variant of the "IPA IN = XP OUT" refereeing methodology I've been using for the last two years at GaryCon.

This time of year Xmas cookies work too.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;936408That's just a variant of the "IPA IN = XP OUT" refereeing methodology I've been using for the last two years at GaryCon.

There's only a couple IPA's I'll even look at, a nice Porter or Stout though, that's a good GMing brew.  Red or Brown ales can work too, winter's a good time for dunkelweizen.  Most IPAs seem to follow the "it's all going to wind up piss anyway, why not just start there?" philosophy, but living in NorCal, there's a staggering amount of microbreweries, so there's some IPAs that are turning me around.

Why not just go to $1 = 1XP?  :D

Quote from: David Johansen;936440Why not just go to $1 = 1XP?  :D

Heh, the GM's Microtransaction Jar.

Quote from: CRKrueger;936434There's only a couple IPA's I'll even look at, a nice Porter or Stout though, that's a good GMing brew.  Red or Brown ales can work too, winter's a good time for dunkelweizen.  Most IPAs seem to follow the "it's all going to wind up piss anyway, why not just start there?" philosophy, but living in NorCal, there's a staggering amount of microbreweries, so there's some IPAs that are turning me around.

I knew someone would come up with the one wrong way of beer drinking. :)   Many a fine winter ale your way, typically love Sierra's Celebration and Anchor's Christmas, Samuel Smith's Winter Warmer a perpetual favorite, but still love me the IPA, or IPL.  Who can resist a massive dose of fresh, fruity hop flavor!  Well my players mostly, have a non-drinker, a wine drinker, a fellow maybe IPA guy, then there is a "scotch is the new IPA" guy.   It's good to have all the drinking archtypes covered.

Quote from: CRKrueger;936482Heh, the GM's Microtransaction Jar.

Nothing "micro" about those transactions if you're using the TSR D&D XP charts.  One character buying his way to name level could be enough to retire on...

Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Why not use it?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Why not use it?

I bet your going to get a lot of people saying they still use it.  I'll say in the day we missed it and when found every GM I met said gp was it's own reward.  In the end I wish we had used it as it incentivized more taking of stuff and carousing than just killing.

I ma really stumped if your telling me D&D doesn't use it anymore, it seems a great way to get more roleplaying into a game.

I like the approach where you don't get the xp for gp until you spend it.   I've seen ideas where different character classes spend it different ways, a cleric may have to tithe, a thief carouse, a magic user invest in a library and study, etc.

For GMing beer I like something malty and weak so I don't have to pay attention to how much I'm drinking. A lowish alcohol malty beer is great for this. Made a double batch of this: http://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=239188 with half (kinda) following the recipe and half not getting any honey, getting a few liters of water and a wimpy yeast (Windsor, really picky eater so leaves a lot of malt flavor behind and doesn't produce too much alcohol). The weak half less alcohol than Bud Light but you can taste the malt for a good ten seconds after you take a drink.

Also making 12 gallons of beer in one session was good.

Proper IPA would just distract me from GMing. Too delicious.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Why not use it?

Mostly because people are lazy about accounting. It's worth it though, encourages people to be sneaky bastards.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Why not use it?

Because it was removed from D&D as the focus shifted.

Also it wasnt quite 1GP = 1 EXP. There was a formula to calculate it.

In OD&D EXP for gold was 1=1. But then modified down if the PC level was greater than the encounters. So a 5thth level character getting 2000 GP equivalent gold from a 2HD monster would get only 800 EXP for the treasure.

In BX it was 1=1. No formula. But DMs could modify the reward based on how easy or hard the encounter was. No EXP for magical treasure.

In AD&D it was 1=1 as well and simmilar to BX was modified as the GM deemed. But you also got EXP for either keeping or selling a magic item. More for selling.

2e phased out EXP for treasure. Its there as an optional. Also no EXP for magic items. Though you did get some EXP for making a magic item.

Pretty sure 3e and onwards totally phased out EXP for treasure. I dont see any mention at all in the 3e?

Quote from: CRKrueger;936434There's only a couple IPA's I'll even look at, a nice Porter or Stout though, that's a good GMing brew.  Red or Brown ales can work too, winter's a good time for dunkelweizen.  Most IPAs seem to follow the "it's all going to wind up piss anyway, why not just start there?" philosophy, but living in NorCal, there's a staggering amount of microbreweries, so there's some IPAs that are turning me around.

Americans tend to exaggerate things.  Just like a few years back we had hot sauces that literally put people in the hospital, we now get IPAs with so many IBUs they're like sucking alum.  But I stick to IPAs from brewers that know what they're doing.  Bell's Two Hearted is a favorite.

Sierra Nevada, who I thought knew better, does an IPA with distilled hop oil.  This loses ALL the flavor and aroma.  The shit tastes like the aftertaste of puking, and no, I'm not kidding.

Quote from: Xanther;936649I bet your going to get a lot of people saying they still use it.

Yep.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;936675Sierra Nevada, who I thought knew better, does an IPA with distilled hop oil.  This loses ALL the flavor and aroma.  The shit tastes like the aftertaste of puking, and no, I'm not kidding.

Stick with the Torpedo.

That's what SHE said.

Actually, no, she said "Stick me with the torpedo" and the next thing I knew we were married...

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;936687Actually, no, she said "Stick me with the torpedo" and the next thing I knew we were married...

"How did you know he was the right man for you?"

"He sank my battleship!"

Quote from: Omega;936661Because it was removed from D&D as the focus shifted.

Also it wasnt quite 1GP = 1 EXP. There was a formula to calculate it.

In OD&D EXP for gold was 1=1. But then modified down if the PC level was greater than the encounters. So a 5thth level character getting 2000 GP equivalent gold from a 2HD monster would get only 800 EXP for the treasure.

In BX it was 1=1. No formula. But DMs could modify the reward based on how easy or hard the encounter was. No EXP for magical treasure.

In AD&D it was 1=1 as well and simmilar to BX was modified as the GM deemed. But you also got EXP for either keeping or selling a magic item. More for selling.

2e phased out EXP for treasure. Its there as an optional. Also no EXP for magic items. Though you did get some EXP for making a magic item.

Pretty sure 3e and onwards totally phased out EXP for treasure. I dont see any mention at all in the 3e?

Do you think it's better with that system compared to the "modern" system of getting experience for milestones, or killing monsters, or doing quests?

I suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

Glad I wasn't drinking coffee...

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936689I suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

I'm going to focus on my character becoming more powerful and influential and not worry about growing a larger dice-cock.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936689Do you think it's better with that system compared to the "modern" system of getting experience for milestones, or killing monsters, or doing quests?

I suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

It's a system.

Better depends on the relevance of the type campaign you want to run.

Well, I assume that most D&D games still consist of the general "go into dungeons, kill stuff, loot treasure," so let's go with that for the sake of comparison.

I suppose games that focus on gathering gold don't have many quests about accomplishing good deeds, but gaining power and profit. That's one big difference between games nowadays and back then.

Hey Daztur, you're a brewer, maybe you know (or Vulmea or Geezer).

Are there different official terms for the "Up front, on the tongue, pucker your mouth like a nun's arsehole bitterness" and the "back of the mouth, aftertaste-like, distillate scorch type bitterness"?  I tried a real strong (11%) triple IPA (Black Diamond's Carnage) and it seemed to have more of the second type of bitterness, but I don't know how to describe it.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Why not use it?

I think you haven't been reading thoroughly enough.

QuoteI suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

Money is not involved in politics?

In the medieval world, being part of the nobility quite literally meant the right to tax people. In the modern world, we have to pay politicians large wages so they do not seek even larger income from bribes; nonetheless, many retiring from their political careers go on to directorships - given them by companies which had lobbied them to have tax deductions or other subsidies while they were in.

Wealth is power. D&D abstracts this by having you level up from it.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936689Do you think it's better with that system compared to the "modern" system of getting experience for milestones, or killing monsters, or doing quests?

I suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

1: Different. Thats about it. With EXP for gold you can get different dynamics of gamaplay than without. Such as shifting goals from wiping out the enemy to instead sneaking past them to loot everything that isnt nailed down. And the that too because you brought a claw hammer.

Also note that by at least BX (not sure about OD&D there was EXP for things other than killing. 2e really ramped that up with rules for garnering EXP for quests, and other non-com things. But it was there in older editions

2: Shift in focus possibly. You in the political game you garner EXP from negotiations and interactions, rewards or completing missions/goals, or thwarting the villains plot. And you might never have gotten into a single combat the whole while. A GP reward even without EXP boon is still likely usefull for long term goals, equipping, bribing and so on.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936703Well, I assume that most D&D games still consist of the general "go into dungeons, kill stuff, loot treasure," so let's go with that for the sake of comparison.

I suppose games that focus on gathering gold don't have many quests about accomplishing good deeds, but gaining power and profit. That's one big difference between games nowadays and back then.

1: You assume wrongly then. Nearly out the gate players were getting into purely non-com political intrigue campaigns and other oddities.

2: Why? Theres nothing stopping players from focusing on the quest rather than the loot? And actually that hasnt changed from now and then. Players still get into dungeon crawls for the loot rather than the combat despite not a drop of EXP from that loot. And players got into intrigues even if it didnt garner as much EXP as dungeoncrawling. Theres allways been more to D&D and most any other RPG than kill kill kill.

Quote from: Omega;9367231: You assume wrongly then. Nearly out the gate players were getting into purely non-com political intrigue campaigns and other oddities.

2: Why? Theres nothing stopping players from focusing on the quest rather than the loot? And actually that hasnt changed from now and then. Players still get into dungeon crawls for the loot rather than the combat despite not a drop of EXP from that loot. And players got into intrigues even if it didnt garner as much EXP as dungeoncrawling. Theres allways been more to D&D and most any other RPG than kill kill kill.

Wait...
You mean D&D players were doing things because they were roleplaying their characters and not just grinding for exp?  
You mean RPGs aren't just about one single thing at a time?  
...crazy talk.

I'd use another Mind Blown meme but two in one thread and I'll probably get yelled at.

Quote from: CRKrueger;936707Are there different official terms for the "Up front, on the tongue, pucker your mouth like a nun's arsehole bitterness" and the "back of the mouth, aftertaste-like, distillate scorch type bitterness"?

Yes. The official terms are "drink tequila instead". Solves the beer problem nicely.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936689Do you think it's better with that system compared to the "modern" system of getting experience for milestones, or killing monsters, or doing quests?

I suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

I've always given xp for overcoming obstacles and challenges (be they monster, traps, exceptional acts of pilfering, or difficult parley), I include exploration these days to satisfy my own desire to see the PCs explore the dungeons more, they're too damn cautious :)

On a political game I guess it would be difficult parley I'd give xp and espionage, but I've never run a primarily political game.  Oh politics come up, as consistently bringing gold and magic items into the city gets you noticed.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936703....

I suppose games that focus on gathering gold don't have many quests about accomplishing good deeds, but gaining power and profit. That's one big difference between games nowadays and back then.

As it's almost Christmas I'll just say that is a very, very incorrect assumption and a little condescending.  Me and my friends always played D&D for high adventure, to right wrongs and protect the innocent.  All out quests were about doing something good.  Gaining power and profit was never an issue, or hampered by doing good.

If someone would make a survival MMO conversion to PnP RPG, I could see making survival mechanics being a major part of the game, and perhaps even the major part.

I have on occasion made the journey across a rough environment the major opponent the characters face, and it has always been received as a great change of pace.

Dragon Storm is close with its hostile environment and need to manage food as its mostly outdoors or ruins. No dungeons. Alot of warped flora and fauna out to kill you on sight. Or the fae thing in the pristine zones where the very purity of the land is damaging you every day you linger.

Dark Sun was supposed to be this and early on had that feel. But over time seemed to shift away.

Star Frontiers pack in module was another.

It can be alot of fun when played right.

Quote from: Spinachcat;936731Yes. The official terms are "drink tequila instead". Solves the beer problem nicely.

Eh, it's not Tequila-like or Scotch-like or anything like that, it was something different I tasted in some IPAs and not others, not the Grapefruit/Alum/Stomach Acid type of bitterness, but something else.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936703I suppose games that focus on gathering gold don't have many quests about accomplishing good deeds, but gaining power and profit. That's one big difference between games nowadays and back then.

No, it's the difference between you and people who aren't condescending assmunching pigfuckers who are too stupid to shit unassisted.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936703I suppose games that focus on gathering gold don't have many quests about accomplishing good deeds, but gaining power and profit. That's one big difference between games nowadays and back then.

The only real difference between playing nowadays and back then are, you weren't there, playing back then...so, maybe stop making grand, sweeping, ridiculously incorrect assumptions about what other people did in a different place and time.  There are actual, well researched books on the early days of the hobby.  It is possible to educate yourself.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Why not use it?

It's great for reaver campaigns.

If you want your campaign to be about poor scum trying to become rich scum, maybe even heroic along the way, then GP = XP rocks the house. Its a constant motivator for PCs to figure out how to get more GPs, so they seek out adventure in your sandbox. Also, if XP doesn't come from monsters (or a wee bit does), then fighting monsters isn't as important as getting the gold so game time becomes more about smart looting than slashing.

My buddy played a "dragonslayer" campaign last year and it was easy to motivate the players. The story was Tiamat (as a goddess, not a big dragon) was coming to the world in one year and the only way to hold her back was to slay 100 of her children.  90% XP came from dragon kills, 10% from other stuff. Thus, the PCs used their time and resources to hunt down dragons, only doing side treks to loot dungeons to buy more stuff to hunt dragons. Gold was for magic crafting or sage lore or organizing expeditions so NPCs would also become slayers.  

Quote from: CRKrueger;936780it was something different I tasted in some IPAs and not others,

Yes, your tongue was telling you that you were tasting bitter beer when instead you could be tasting tequila.

Thus your tongue made the sad face. :(

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Random question: everyone talks about 1 gold = 1XP as a great system from the good old days.

But nobody ever uses it anymore, even the people who say it's good.

Back in the good old days, I was a teenage boy playing with a bunch of other teenage boys, and we always thought XP for GP was stupid, so we didn't use it and then proceeded to play pure hack-n-slash games because killing monsters was all that mattered.  (Of course, being teenage boys probably had something to do with the hack-n-slash, too.)

These days, the most recent D&D-style game I've played was an ACKS campaign that I ran a couple years ago.  I did use XP for GP, with about 80% of available XP being from loot.  Unfortunately, the players were all more accustomed to D&D 3.x, so they didn't really catch on to the importance of gathering up the loot and spent most of their time getting beat to hell by lizardmen for 500 XP, then running home to heal up without even trying to find the 6000 XP worth of treasure in the next room over and feeling cheated when they came back two weeks later to find nothing left there aside from some scrape marks on the floor from when the surviving lizardmen dragged their chests of loot away.  I did finally manage to get the XP system through to them, but, yeah...

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936645Why not use it?

Because the latest trend seems to be towards "XP is pointless bookkeeping, so don't track XP, just level everyone up in unison when the GM thinks it's dramatically appropriate".  Because it's unthinkable that you might have a 7th level character and an 8th level character in the same party, or something.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936689Do you think it's better with that system compared to the "modern" system of getting experience for milestones, or killing monsters, or doing quests?

It's different.  Personally, I tend to favor systems where you get better at doing a thing explicitly by doing that thing, so I'm mostly into BRP-based systems these days, rather than those which give out bundles of nebulous, non-specific XP.  If you are going to do XP bundles, though, I prefer that they be delivered for objective, in-character actions, whether that be finding loot or killing monsters or picking pockets or whatever, rather than for out-of-character narrative goals like reaching the next station on the GM's railroad.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936689I suppose it becomes less useful if your game is not just about dungeon crawling. If it's a political game for instance... what are you going to do.

ACKS doesn't restrict its XP for GP model to only loot taken from monsters.  GP earned through mercantile ventures, taxing your peasants, etc. also provides XP.  So negotiating a trade deal or convincing your neighbor to cede a border village might not net you any XP today, but it will provide a steady stream of XP month after month for as long as you can keep the trade route open or hold on to the village.

Quote from: Bluddworth;936772If someone would make a survival MMO conversion to PnP RPG, I could see making survival mechanics being a major part of the game, and perhaps even the major part.

I have on occasion made the journey across a rough environment the major opponent the characters face, and it has always been received as a great change of pace.

It always is in my post-apocalyptic games.  I like to use attrition, so being slight hungry, thirsty, eating questionable food, all lower your performance.  That might be one reasons marauders use chems all the time. :)

Quote from: CRKrueger;936707Hey Daztur, you're a brewer, maybe you know (or Vulmea or Geezer).

Are there different official terms for the "Up front, on the tongue, pucker your mouth like a nun's arsehole bitterness" and the "back of the mouth, aftertaste-like, distillate scorch type bitterness"?  I tried a real strong (11%) triple IPA (Black Diamond's Carnage) and it seemed to have more of the second type of bitterness, but I don't know how to describe it.

Sorta. The main source of bitterness in IPAs is isomerized hop alpha acids. It's the stuff that's measured by IBUs (internatinal bitterness units) and it's pretty front of the tongue.

But it's not the only kind of bitterness

There's yeast bite that might be there if the beer isn't filtered. That can be pretty harsh. Also bits of hop goop but those won't be in commercial beer unless someone fucked up.

But these days it's getting more popular to get hop oils in beer. Hops don't have a lot of oils and they're a pain in the ass to get into the beer so people often do it by putting in insane amount of hops and boiling the hops less. For a big IPA like that it probably had a huge dry hop (soaking raw hops in the beer for days instead of cooking them). If you have a lot of hop oils in beer they can be bitter and if you have enough they can coat your mouth, go to the back of your throat and have a long long aftertaste that just IBUs don't give.

Hop oils also dissipate and react in bad ways with oxygen. With alpha acids you just boil shit a lot but hop oils are so annoying to manage so beers that do it well become very trendy.

Hop oils are also confusing as all hell since there's a bunch of different ones and they react with each other and the fermentatin process in weird ways that are hard to understand. Or at least hard to understand in ways aside from "add more citra hops."

Edit: oh one more thing. There are a couple different kinds of alpha acids (what's measured by IBUs) and some people percieve cohumolone alpha acids as being a lot harsher than the other ones. If you're getting a nasty bite from some IPAs that isn't present in others it might be the cohumolone.

There are also beta acids. But I don't understand what they do.

Beer geekery is a deep deep deep rabbit hole. You get beer nerd posts with a dozen academic footnotes.

Quote from: CRKrueger;936787The only real difference between playing nowadays and back then are, you weren't there, playing back then...so, maybe stop making grand, sweeping, ridiculously incorrect assumptions about what other people did in a different place and time.  There are actual, well researched books on the early days of the hobby.  It is possible to educate yourself.

I got my assumptions from reading all the "back in my day" from you guys on this forum lol

Quote from: Omega;9367231: You assume wrongly then. Nearly out the gate players were getting into purely non-com political intrigue campaigns and other oddities.

2: Why? Theres nothing stopping players from focusing on the quest rather than the loot? And actually that hasnt changed from now and then. Players still get into dungeon crawls for the loot rather than the combat despite not a drop of EXP from that loot. And players got into intrigues even if it didnt garner as much EXP as dungeoncrawling. Theres allways been more to D&D and most any other RPG than kill kill kill.

Well, I assume people want to level up. So -if- you only get EXP from gold, then it seems players would focus on the gold rather than questing. That's what I meant.

If people just ignored that and then went on to quest anyway, well that's another matter. Or if people used their own different rules.

But it seems to me that if you use gold for exp, and then run that as is, it would encourage primarily gold hunting.

In my own 5e game to get around the experience forcing a certain game style, I just award a set level of experience every session no matter what. That way if they spend the night carousing in a bar, or hunting monsters, or negotiating deals with a baron, they get the same experience.

The gold the system always looked interesting though so I wondered how different mechanical incentives would affect player behavior.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936892I got my assumptions from reading all the "back in my day" from you guys on this forum lol

Well, I assume people want to level up. So -if- you only get EXP from gold, then it seems players would focus on the gold rather than questing. That's what I meant.

In my own 5e game to get around the experience forcing a certain game style, I just award a set level of experience every session no matter what. That way if they spend the night carousing in a bar, or hunting monsters, or negotiating deals with a baron, they get the same experience.

The gold the system always looked interesting though so I wondered how different mechanical incentives would affect player behavior.

1: Where? Even Gronan has noted several times that gameplay didnt fit any sort of pigeonhole. The PCs went on adventures and from what hes said and from my own gameplay as a player the idea was to explore and adventure. Not to level up level up level up up up.

2: Again this is an overall wrong assumption. Levelling up tends to not be the focus of gameplay unless you are with really low grade players or theres some reason in game to get stronger such as to face a threat that is currently outside their ability to handle. Sure there are players who are obsessed with levelling only. But they probably arent much fun to have around. The current group I DM for and the one Im gaming with both are totally unconcerned with levelling up.

3: How is it "forcing" a certain game style? Are your players obsessed with levelling up?

4: No more or less than anything else. Players will take their PCs on adventures and may or may not game the system or what they focus on accomplishing or not. Nothings changed.

Quote from: Omega;9369021: Where? Even Gronan has noted several times that gameplay didnt fit any sort of pigeonhole. The PCs went on adventures and from what hes said and from my own gameplay as a player the idea was to explore and adventure. Not to level up level up level up up up.

2: Again this is an overall wrong assumption. Levelling up tends to not be the focus of gameplay unless you are with really low grade players or theres some reason in game to get stronger such as to face a threat that is currently outside their ability to handle. Sure there are players who are obsessed with levelling only. But they probably arent much fun to have around. The current group I DM for and the one Im gaming with both are totally unconcerned with levelling up.

3: How is it "forcing" a certain game style? Are your players obsessed with levelling up?

4: No more or less than anything else. Players will take their PCs on adventures and may or may not game the system or what they focus on accomplishing or not. Nothings changed.

Most of the posts I see talking about older gaming is about how everyone would go for sneaking around to steal gold rather than fight monsters, etc. Which I don't find bad, just noted it.

And I don't mean that the players would be obsessed with leveling, but that ideally the rules should reflect the kind of game you want to play. So that means knowing what kind of behavior specific rules encourage, so you can pick the best rules for the kind of game you want.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936892In my own 5e game to get around the experience forcing a certain game style, I just award a set level of experience every session no matter what. That way if they spend the night carousing in a bar, or hunting monsters, or negotiating deals with a baron, they get the same experience.

Yay! everyone gets a ribbon! you're all winners, kids! Goddamnit, we didn't spend half a century fighting communism just to have you slip it into gaming! What the fuck is wrong with you?!

Mind you, it's just 5e, so go ahead, nobody cares.

I can't be arsed to care about XP either.

Did you survive? Did you succeed? Great, here's a level.

I max my OD&D at 10th level and my adventures are high kill so live fast, die hard works perfect for me.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;936892The gold the system always looked interesting though so I wondered how different mechanical incentives would affect player behavior.

Most players will chase what gives them XP.

In CoC and RQ, you get skill learning rolls from using skills in game. Thus, players will try to use lots of skills during the game.

If XP came from collecting magic mushrooms, that's what the PCs would quest for.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;936924Yay! everyone gets a ribbon! you're all winners, kids! Goddamnit, we didn't spend half a century fighting communism just to have you slip it into gaming! What the fuck is wrong with you?!

Mind you, it's just 5e, so go ahead, nobody cares.

lolol

Believe me, I resisted it at first. But the way I did it before was milestone experience, and my players felt that they were like in a desert where they wouldn't gain anything for like 10 sessions, punctuated by an oasis now and then. Since we would only play once every 2-4 weeks I decided to bite the bullet and give them something each session so they felt a sense of progress.

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

Yes. Every game. It never got phased out into the background. Pretty damn good once the players realized that you were taking rations, water, and encumbrance into account because it often forced them into more well-thought plans than just "CHARGE!!"

Quote from: Omega;935177And 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)

It works great in Traveller as well, especially when you start to include things like life support and fuel expenditures.

There is even a subgame of Traveller for colony building where you get a budget, an initial population, and a world survey to start. The group must buy equipment, including food and supplies, then use that as all they have to start a colony on a new world. The task of making the colony self-sufficient and detailed exploration of the world is one that is the focus for the first few games. It is less Adventure! and more survival story and thought problems, but makes for a nice change of pace.

I largely ignore encumbrance and rations but use the full Rolemaster experience system.  Go figure.

One good thing about the GP = XP experience system is that is gets everyone on the same page. Often if you have everyone write out a long backstory then you have one guy who wants revenge against the orcs who killed his family, another guy who wants to quest to find the sword of his ancestors and blah blah blahdy blah.

Much easier to have "bunch of guys who want money for various reasons" and then point them at place with money it in and then have more stuff emerge out of play. That way you also don't have to feel like you're cajoling players with quests, make them have to cajole people into giving them stories about treasure.

Money is also USEFUL.  Building castles and arming retainers is expensive, doggone it!  Medieval nobles were always short of ready cash... Edward III of England pawned the royal plate several times.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;937039Money is also USEFUL.  Building castles and arming retainers is expensive, doggone it!  Medieval nobles were always short of ready cash... Edward III of England pawned the royal plate several times.

Exactly! You need coin, and usually lots of it, to fund your projects. Be it that dream castle you desire built, that conquering army you crave, or just to fund your next expedition and delve. If my current 5e character hadnt started with a nice windfall of coin I would most assuredly have been looking for good paying quests to fund my usual desire to have a caravan mobile home.

In Star Frontiers the only reason two of the PCs went on the expedition was to garner funds towards their eventual goal of purchasing their own starship.

I wonder if the decision to shift away from xp=gp in 2e AD&D was because the perception was that people were moving away from the resource-management game or because of the perception that people were moving away from the keep and fiefdom late game (so there was less to spend the gold on), or something else.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;937120I wonder if the decision to shift away from xp=gp in 2e AD&D was because the perception was that people were moving away from the resource-management game or because of the perception that people were moving away from the keep and fiefdom late game (so there was less to spend the gold on), or something else.

One of the reasons some - perhaps many - gamers disliked Traveller back in the day is that improving skills was a chore and slow as molasses, and simply growing wealthy and powerful and influential wasn't as big a rush as bigger attribute or skill numbers on their character sheets.

When dice become your surrogate cock, then you want rewards to be your Viagra hit.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;937123When dice become your surrogate cock, then you want rewards to be your Viagra hit.

Funny, but not on point.

D&D beyond AD&D 1e - and really, beyond B/X - no longer had the "dungeon exploration -> wilderness exploration -> realm creation focus. BECMI still had it as a possibility (with Dominion and War Machine rules), but the real focus was on perpetual "adventuring."

The wargaming aspect was essentially a legacy that didn't fit with what the vast majority of new players were looking for.

Those are, in some respects, two (possibly three) distinct games, and did not appeal to everyone. Given that (and the almost complete lack of guidance in most of the books on transitioning from one playstyle to the next), it's not surprising that these were dropped in favor of "more of the same, but different" endless questing.

Like many early D&D rules, it seems to me that the DM's who don't have problems with the weird rules, do not use the weird rules, or adjust, overrule, or stop using them as soon as they become weird.

"Rule that makes no sense is fine because when we care that it doesn't make sense, the DM doesn't use that rule. Only am awful DM would actually use such a rule when it makes no sense."

It's interesting that this is used in replies as if it is a defense of the rules that make no sense.

Quote from: Skarg;937131Like many early D&D rules, it seems to me that the DM's who don't have problems with the weird rules, do not use the weird rules, or adjust, overrule, or stop using them as soon as they become weird.

"Rule that makes no sense is fine because when we care that it doesn't make sense, the DM doesn't use that rule. Only am awful DM would actually use such a rule when it makes no sense."

It's interesting that this is used in replies as if it is a defense of the rules that make no sense.

That's the Rule 0 Fallacy.  Since Rule 0 of every RPG either stated or implied is that the GM can change any rule, therefore all criticism of the RPG's rules is invalid.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;937130. . . [T]he real focus was on perpetual "adventuring."

Yes, because perpetual adventuring makes your dice-cock grow longer, faster. That's why everything the adventurers did became suffused with gaining experience.

It has fuck-all to do with the endgame (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/search/label/endgame).

Quote from: darthfozzywig;937130The wargaming aspect was essentially a legacy that didn't fit with what the vast majority of new players were looking for.

On this at least we can agree.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;937149Yes, because perpetual adventuring makes your dice-cock grow longer, faster. That's why everything the adventurers did became suffused with gaining experience.

Again, wrong.

It's a matter of play style. The original endgame of D&D was a completely different game. It's like if in the final round of Trivial Pursuit, suddenly your little pie becomes a rolling tank in a first-person shooter, powered by the little pieces you've acquired. Maybe that's awesome, but if you hate FPS games, you're going to want to keep drawing cards and answering questions.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;937149It has fuck-all to do with the endgame (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/search/label/endgame).


On this at least we can agree.

I like your blog.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;937149makes your dice-cock grow longer, faster.

Ok, now I'm listening!  Over the years my dice-cock has become soft and mushy and dog-legs sharply to the left.

Quote from: Skarg;937131Like many early D&D rules, it seems to me that the DM's who don't have problems with the weird rules, do not use the weird rules, or adjust, overrule, or stop using them as soon as they become weird.

"Rule that makes no sense is fine because when we care that it doesn't make sense, the DM doesn't use that rule. Only am awful DM would actually use such a rule when it makes no sense."

It's interesting that this is used in replies as if it is a defense of the rules that make no sense.

False dichotomy.  Rules can make eminent sense in terms of making a game that works and plays well without making sense in the "fictional game world."  Hit points and XP for gold work to make a very well-playing game of a certain type.  Some of us just aren't pedantic assweasels.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;937149It has fuck-all to do with the endgame (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.com/search/label/endgame).

Nice blog.

Also, the first players were all wargamers.  Take a bunch of wargamers, give them lands, castles, treasuries, and armies, and stand back.  There WILL be wars.

(I have been called a big meanie for advocating this mindset.)

Quote from: RunningLaser;937151Ok, now I'm listening!  Over the years my dice-cock has become soft and mushy and dog-legs sharply to the left.

Take two 4e D&D Players Handbooks and call a doctor if you experience an erection lasting more than four hours or one combat encounter, whichever is longer.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;937150The original endgame of D&D was a completely different game.

Yes and no. The "endgame" began long before reaching name level and establishing a domain, through alliances and reciprocity, and once your character did establish a domain - something not all characters can do, actually - your henchmen continued to live lives of adventure.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;937153Take a bunch of wargamers, give them lands, castles, treasuries, and armies, and stand back.  There WILL be wars.

My Boot Hill character, aligned with the Cowboys and the Boosters, is angling to be sheriff, the second character, aligned with the cattlemen and the Wednesday Afternoon Bible Circle, is running for marshal, and the third character's troupe could end up tilting the election one way or the other.

There will be blood.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;937153(I have been called a big meanie for advocating this mindset.)

Fuck 'em.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;937150I like your blog.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;937153Nice blog.

Thank you both.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;937152False dichotomy.  Rules can make eminent sense in terms of making a game that works and plays well without making sense in the "fictional game world."  Hit points and XP for gold work to make a very well-playing game of a certain type.  Some of us just aren't pedantic assweasels.

Huh. Sounds like a slightly different perspective saying the same sort of thing.

I know Gronan's in one of his moods where anything even remotely resembling real life in a game is anathema, so I apologize for what this is about to do to his hemorrhoids...

Quote from: darthfozzywig;937150The original endgame of D&D was a completely different game.

Just like real life. :D
Player becomes coach.
Cop moves behind a desk.
Soldiers move from being a grunt to commanding a squad, then platoon, then company.
Doctor becomes head of a department.

You get good enough at anything, you cease to be the one with boots on the ground and become the one planning and giving orders, because that's how shit works, it's how humanity has always and will always work.  Even systems that are designed to be run with the lowest common denominator, cream rises to the top despite the bureaucracy and you cease doing what you love, to managing people who are doing what you love.

But...whoever said that's what you HAD to do?  
The King wants to make you a Baron and take over his most dangerous frontier province.  You wait until you get out of his throne room away from his guards, then hit the frontier province and keep on riding.  
The people want you to lead them, say no.  Just be the one who takes out threats and enriches the local economy and have them elect other leaders.  Since you're the one leveling by killing all the bad guys, you can always waste the stupid tinpot dictators and cattlemen with delusions of grandeur who become the wannabe BBEG.

Quote from: CRKrueger;937282But...whoever said that's what you HAD to do?  
The King wants to make you a Baron and take over his most dangerous frontier province.  You wait until you get out of his throne room away from his guards, then hit the frontier province and keep on riding.

That's a good point. Building a stronghold - and again, not every character is allowed to do this - is something you choose to do, not something you're required to do.

Quote from: CRKrueger;937282I know Gronan's in one of his moods where anything even remotely resembling real life in a game is anathema, so I apologize for what this is about to do to his hemorrhoids...

Just like real life. :D
Player becomes coach.
Cop moves behind a desk.
Soldiers move from being a grunt to commanding a squad, then platoon, then company.
Doctor becomes head of a department.

You get good enough at anything, you cease to be the one with boots on the ground and become the one planning and giving orders, because that's how shit works, it's how humanity has always and will always work.  Even systems that are designed to be run with the lowest common denominator, cream rises to the top despite the bureaucracy and you cease doing what you love, to managing people who are doing what you love.

But...whoever said that's what you HAD to do?  
The King wants to make you a Baron and take over his most dangerous frontier province.  You wait until you get out of his throne room away from his guards, then hit the frontier province and keep on riding.  
The people want you to lead them, say no.  Just be the one who takes out threats and enriches the local economy and have them elect other leaders.  Since you're the one leveling by killing all the bad guys, you can always waste the stupid tinpot dictators and cattlemen with delusions of grandeur who become the wannabe BBEG.

And since enough people wanted to do that instead of build a stronghold et al, they took out the stronghold building part of the game.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;937316And since enough people wanted to do that instead of build a stronghold et al, they took out the stronghold building part of the game.

It was still there to 2e. And 5e brings it back a little. Theres still players who like this sort of "next level" of gameplay.

I mostly track food and encumbrance in post-apocalyptic campaigns, or during expeditions when the PCs can't take enough pack animals for some reason. Neither has happened in a while, though:).
If I did, I'd probably let them explain how they're packing stuff and what, then check the required numbers against the days of travel;).

For my part, I only make PCs track food carefully in situations where food could not be easily obtained. Otherwise it's a waste of time.

As for encumbrance, I used to despise encumbrance, until the very straightforward system for it in LotFP showed up. Now whenever I use an encumbrance system (which I regularly do in my OSR gaming now), it's based on that one.

What is LotFP's like?

I usually just track supplies by week/tenday/equivalent. Do you have enough to make it one week? And at the end of a week check off those supplies. (assuming nothing else changed that in between.)

Whereas in Dragon Storm its day to day checks due to its wilderness base rather than dungeon. Though as mentioned earlier its possible to forage and get along.

One interesting thing in 5e was that it got me to paying more attention to the logistics of feeding your pack animals and the logistics of transporting the feed. About 150lb just to cover 10 days for the horse pulling the caravan home. Another 70lb per party member. 360lb of supplies alone. But we are good to go for a full 10 days on our own if need be.

Just noticed something odd in 5e while doing some notation after a player asked.

The Explorers Pack weighs 59lb and the Dungeoneers Pack weighs 56lb. Thus you need a minimum of 12 STR to lug either around unencumbered. And any weapons or such will very likely tip you over into encumbered.
The Diplomats pack weighs freaking 36lb because for god unknown reasons the character wants to strap a 25lb chest to their back... (but forgot to pack any food or drink...)
The Burglars Pack weighs 47lb.

Quote from: Omega;938915I usually just track supplies by week/tenday/equivalent. Do you have enough to make it one week? And at the end of a week check off those supplies. (assuming nothing else changed that in between.)

Whereas in Dragon Storm its day to day checks due to its wilderness base rather than dungeon. Though as mentioned earlier its possible to forage and get along.

One interesting thing in 5e was that it got me to paying more attention to the logistics of feeding your pack animals and the logistics of transporting the feed. About 150lb just to cover 10 days for the horse pulling the caravan home. Another 70lb per party member. 360lb of supplies alone. But we are good to go for a full 10 days on our own if need be.

That's if you carry your water though (I don't know about horses, but food rations for people is 2 lbs/day). If you carry your water with you, then supplies are indeed heavy.

Quote from: Omega;939593Just noticed something odd in 5e while doing some notation after a player asked.

The Explorers Pack weighs 59lb and the Dungeoneers Pack weighs 56lb. Thus you need a minimum of 12 STR to lug either around unencumbered. And any weapons or such will very likely tip you over into encumbered.
The Diplomats pack weighs freaking 36lb because for god unknown reasons the character wants to strap a 25lb chest to their back... (but forgot to pack any food or drink...)
The Burglars Pack weighs 47lb.

I think it's a feature, not a bug (minus the chest for a diplomat, that seems silly). Light/medium/heavy encumbrance is optional. If you want to go realistic, then you're very likely to be slowed (or just have your armor/weapons/etc. while your hirelings cart around your food and tent and such). If you want to be a party of 4-8 who can go off into the wilderness without a support crew and go exploring dungeons with just the stuff you can carry on your back, then use the base 15xstr system.

Hirelings, while in 5e, are still somewhat downplayed. So assume that the PCs are either lugging all this themselves, or have some pack animals.

In 5e if using the encumberance rules then STR x5 is the limit before you become encumbered and slow down by 10. And x10 slows you down 10 more and have disadvantage on some stat checks. So if you are in a mixed group then its probably ok to load up more.

To clarify. Strx5/x10/x15 is the more realistic option. If you choose to use the cinematic/whatever you want to call it rules, the cap is Strx15, but you are still using encumbrance rules.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;939647To clarify. Strx5/x10/x15 is the more realistic option. If you choose to use the cinematic/whatever you want to call it rules, the cap is Strx15, but you are still using encumbrance rules.

um... incorrect?

Base is STR x15. No encumbrance. You just have a carrying limit.
Encumbrance version is the 5/10/15.

So its either on, or off.
Push/Drag/Lift rules kick in once you pass the x15 in either. Dropping you to 5 movement. The max max cap is x30.

I think so far only the Goliath race from Volo's guide can exceed that since they have the trait that they count as Large for their carrying capacity, which doubles their cap.

Quote from: Omega;939712um... incorrect?

Base is STR x15. No encumbrance. You just have a carrying limit.
Encumbrance version is the 5/10/15.

So its either on, or off.
Push/Drag/Lift rules kick in once you pass the x15 in either. Dropping you to 5 movement. The max max cap is x30.

So you can carry up to 15xstr, and then Push/Drag/Lift rules kick in. How is that not an encumbrance system?

Edit: It doesn't matter, it's semantics. My main point, however, was that you do have a weight limit even if you don't use the  5/10/15 rules, whatever you call it.

Depends on the game. Like in 50 Fathoms the PCs have a ship (making encumbrance generally meaningless except when leaving the ship or for personal gear carried), but food is very important with so many crew, so Survival is very important. In my supers game, Necessary Evil, I don't worry about survival too much. The PCs are assumed to be eating rats and dirty water in sewers if not paying for food, but hey as supers it doesn't hurt them. Encumbrance tends to be more important, at least for low-strength supers. That way they aren't just monty-hauling back all sorts of high-tech enemy equipment after every battle. In my fantasy Shaintar game, they were in the Grey Rangers and were supplied enough food to get to their mission site (aka GM food), with their return food needed to get themselves (as Rangers they were expected to be able to gather their own food and water on the way there and back to make up for the rest of the journey and cut down on food and water costs for the Grayson's Grey Rangers).  Encumbrance was also important in that game.

If you don't feel like tracking such things, just make it come up when narratively important. Carry what you want, but then a pack of zombies chase you and you seem to be encumbered and a bit slower than the rest of the group...dropping that pack? Ok your pack had your food and water and now you need to gather more supplies or die of thirst and starvation. So just bring it up when its important versus actively tracking it.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;939720So you can carry up to 15xstr, and then Push/Drag/Lift rules kick in. How is that not an encumbrance system?

Edit: It doesn't matter, it's semantics. My main point, however, was that you do have a weight limit even if you don't use the  5/10/15 rules, whatever you call it.

Because thats not encumbrance? Thats moving into a different category. Trying to move a weight instead of carrying a weight. Past the x15 you can barely move an object by pushing or dragging. And cant even move when lifting.

I think we just have different conceptions of the requirements of something being an encumbrance system, and it's really not a big deal.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;939890I think we just have different conceptions of the requirements of something being an encumbrance system, and it's really not a big deal.

Sorry. No. Push/Pull/Lift isnt even mentioned in encumbrance. Which, you know, covers carrying stuff over a distance.

Oh wait. You dont know.

Woohoo Rainman Party!  Let me join in.

An encumbrance system is a means of determining when you become encumbered.

Encumber: restrict or burden (someone or something) in such a way that free action or movement is difficult.

So, if you simply defined via strength what you could Push/Pull/Lift, that would not be an encumbrance system.
If, however, you defined how fast or far you can move when Pushing/Pulling/Lifting those weights, then that would be an encumbrance system, at the very least under the case of Lift.

:D

Speaking as a trainer, in encumbrance discussions it is always obvious that the participants do not push, pull or lift anything heavier than a box of doughnuts.

It brings to mind the great Overland Hiking monster thread on the GURPS forums. Ah, those were the days... :)

Quote from: Omega;940029Sorry. No. Push/Pull/Lift isnt even mentioned in encumbrance. Which, you know, covers carrying stuff over a distance.

Oh wait. You dont know.

Seriously? I don't know because I disagree with you on terminology? That's... an interesting interpretation.

To clarify my position. If the only rule for carrying was "characters have a maximum load of 150 lbs.," and no other text, I would still say that is an encumbrance system. Maybe a more technical definition would be a carrying capacity system, but that sounds like proof by hairsplitting.

Again, my main goal was to clarify that there is a weight limit in 5e, even if not using the str x 5/10/15 rules, regardless of what they are called. The rest I do not care about, and am mildly amused you've decided to turn into an argument. I see no need to continue this tangent and derail this thread. Feel free to continue on your own if you like.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;940067Speaking as a trainer, in encumbrance discussions it is always obvious that the participants do not push, pull or lift anything heavier than a box of doughnuts.

:D
Not a trainer, but I also find encumbrance discussions to be lots of fun, though possibly for different reasons;).

What's the weight limit, x15? Does that mean you just literally collapse under all the weight?

Quote from: CRKrueger;940037So, if you simply defined via strength what you could Push/Pull/Lift, that would not be an encumbrance system.
If, however, you defined how fast or far you can move when Pushing/Pulling/Lifting those weights, then that would be an encumbrance system, at the very least under the case of Lift.

:D

Except... you cant move while lifting something over your cap.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;940153What's the weight limit, x15? Does that mean you just literally collapse under all the weight?

Standard carrying capacity is STR x15. You can lift something up to X30, But cant move. So with the default with a 10 STR you can tote around 150lb of stuff. Past that you cant move. But you can hold it up to 300lb and then past that yeah you buckle.

With the optional encumbrance system its up to STR x5 unencumbered, up to x10 is encumbered and up to x15 is heavily encumbered. So Same 10 STR is fine up to 50lb, slowed down some up to 100lb and really hindered up to 150lb.

How long would you say it takes to don and doff the dungeoneering packs that you get in 5e?

Are they just like school backpacks that you can drop at a whim?

Pretty sure by the rules it is an object interaction (of which you get one per round).

Well, my question is if the backpacks are such that they CAN be removed in only one action, or if it's like armor where you have to take like a minute.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;941130Well, my question is if the backpacks are such that they CAN be removed in only one action, or if it's like armor where you have to take like a minute.

PHB says a backpack is 1 cubic foot/30lb. So not very big. But no info is given on how much it takes to get on and off. Its not covered in the free action rules so could be it takes one action or full action to remove? Simmilar to doffing a shield?

I'm not sure how long a round is in 5e, but if I absolutely had to I could schuck my Appalachian Trail- worthy backpack in less than 12 seconds, and probably 6. That would be undoing the waist buckle (which won't break), the strap buckle across my chest (which might- plastic vs fear), and slipping off the shoulder straps letting it fall. It can hold 2.5 cubic feet of gear, runs shoulders to hip.

6 seconds in 5e. Hence why figured its probably jut an action. So you could drop your pack and unsheath your sword, but not attack that round if you wanted to for example. Or if you had weapon ready then use the free action to drop the pack.

Quote from: Baron Opal;941533I'm not sure how long a round is in 5e, but if I absolutely had to I could schuck my Appalachian Trail- worthy backpack in less than 12 seconds, and probably 6. That would be undoing the waist buckle (which won't break), the strap buckle across my chest (which might- plastic vs fear), and slipping off the shoulder straps letting it fall. It can hold 2.5 cubic feet of gear, runs shoulders to hip.

The thing is, "packs" in fantasy land aren't modern ones, they're more like carrying a tent on your back.

At least that's what I always thought.

Granted it is fantasy, but with the base presumption of a world similar to ours I don't see humans making their backpacks laboriously hard to take off. What with wild animals, perilous heights and narrow stretches, water crossings, etc. being able to disengage a harness to stave off death would seem like a useful thing to prepare for. I mean, it's not like quick untying knots and sharp knives were unknown... Would have made migration and settling by 'the fantasy ancestors' a rather harder task.

Or perhaps complex knots stave off pixies and heavy backpacks help turtle against owlbears? But what do I know, I don't bother camping or hiking further than running hot water...

Right. At least at the basics a D&D backpack is apparently something fairly managable and isnt strapped on like armour. My Warlock PC never takes his off as I try not to load it up. I keep droppables in sacks and such that can be just let go of or quick set down. The backpack holds the survival gear. Aint dropping that!

As a DM I do though occasionally remind the players that just dropping stuff might risk breaking something or spilling out the contents.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;941703The thing is, "packs" in fantasy land aren't modern ones, they're more like carrying a tent on your back.

At least that's what I always thought.

How do you want packs to work?

If you are happy with PCs dropping a pack in an action, then fine, If you need them to undo loads of straps and so on then also fine.

There doesn't always need to be an official rule about something.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;941703The thing is, "packs" in fantasy land aren't modern ones, they're more like carrying a tent on your back.

At least that's what I always thought.

Oh, I'm sure. I added the details so that others could extrapolate.

From what I understand, backpacks from the Middle Ages were either cloth or leather sacks with shoulder straps, or wicker baskets with shoulder straps and potentially a belt. That's what it looks like in the paintings I've seen.

I normally don't track food and encumbrance. As long as the players are being reasonable, it's not an issue. Also, in D&D the ease of access of create food and water takes away the need to bring food on journeys.

However, I'm preparing for an underdark campaign where I will use custom encumbrance rules. Create food and water will not work in my underdark, and Light spells will +3 level in access. The campaign will be about journeying over large distances and exploration in a hostile environment. The key will be to make it a fun and interesting sub-system, so different trade-offs between using humanoid porters, rothe, giant lizards, and giant beetles as bearers, along with potential problems with getting those bearers over obstacles and keeping them alive.

Quote from: Haffrung;942163However, I'm preparing for an underdark campaign where I will use custom encumbrance rules. Create food and water will not work in my underdark, and Light spells will +3 level in access. The campaign will be about journeying over large distances and exploration in a hostile environment.

I have different qualities of food provide different levels of restoration. Fresh food is best, followed by dried / preserved, and then magically created. Magically created food will keep you alive, but if you want to regain your hit points, &c., at a reasonable rate, you better have the real deal.