Carrying Capacity & Encumbrance

[xanther]

So why are you guys playing D&D when there are other games out there that do what you want already? Lack of players in the other games?

I'm not playing D&D, or more precisely won't run a D&D game but will play in a friends game. It's perfectly serviceable as a bash 'em game for me.

Stopped dealing with D&D's stuff long, long ago, and how it just got in the way, how it was a poor rule set fit for the swords & sorcery characters that inspired me to play RPGs, or could be wonky if one adhered too hard to certain RAW. It's not like any critique I may have is new.

I've had no problems getting players for my own rules and games, but yes the 20 somethings I know initially only know of D&D, they have no idea about other RPGs. They may want to play D&D first, but once they play (usually takes between 3 to 6 sessions)...all know so far have been very open to something else. Or more precisely, they start rattling of a string of stuff that got in the way, which aligns with mine and what folks have been saying since '78.

These folks though want to role play, to be in a living setting with internal consistency they can interact with; they want more than run into range and hit, they want story to emerge (not be plotted), they don't want their actions constrained by a grab bag of feats (which they have likened to Magic and collectable card games of which they all played when young) or simplistic rules that seem only about abstract yet fiddly combat.

Funny, they don't want their RPG to be like a CCG or computer game, writing a short story, or making a movie, they have those, they do those, they want an RPG for what those media cannot do. Also they don't see it as a "war game" not that any of them have played those.

So my own rules they love as I designed them to address all the stuff I never liked in early D&D (or current D&D), and the stuff i didn't like they don't like either; and there is a better way (to me) to get the stuff I and they like than the D&D way.

Yet played so much of D&D back in the day (that day beginning in late '77 IIRC) and with so many groups (and versions from OD&D, BECMI, AD&D), and read the articles in White Dwarf and Dragon etc., etc. and played other FRPG of the day that it is just easy to chime in on the D&D stuff.

As to the OP, never cared for D&D encumbrance, too encumbering, but not a bad approach at all, just more book keeping than we needed. Personally I use a limited number of slots approach (8, backpacks give you more) and filled slots weigh, 1, 2 or 3 "kg" depending on density...most gear and stuff is 2, gold is a 3. Then again, reason prevails and encumbrance only consulted if looking to lighten ones load to get an advantage (I use a carrot approach, and it give that is why the barbarian fights in just a loincloth ) or trying to max out the treasure haul...then it's empty as many slots as you can and fill them with gold.

 

[xanther]

...I only do a formal tally if there is a dispute or the rare circumstances where every pound counts. The last time that happened in one my games, the party got into a fight inside of a working castles, and found its treasury. They wanted to get out ASAP so figured out exactly how much everyone could carry....

Same. Almost went to the silver standard but my imaginations wants piles of gold...I'm odd though. I use a lot of electrum after seeing it was pretty common in the ancient world.

 

[Torque2100]

If you are looking for work to crib, I would highly reccomended looking at the encumbrance system from SLA industries 2nd edition. I have found it strikes a happy median between overly detailed encumbrance systems and still penalizing poor planning.

SLA uses a highly abstracted encumbrance system where most items only have a weight of 1 or 2, but your carry weight will probably be 8 if you're not playing a STR monster character so it adds up fast.

 

[robertsconley]

So why are you guys playing D&D when there are other games out there that do what you want already? Lack of players in the other games?

I can readily share the material I make, whether it is commercial or not, without dealing with the "wink wink" and "nudge nudge." The fact is I like to share the stuff I create. The less "wink wink" and "nudge nudge" I am forced to do the more useful I can make the stuff I share.

Also because after reading up on its history* I "get" it in a way I didn't back in the 80s. Allowing me to apply the stuff I liked and learned using Ars Magica, Fantasy Hero, GURPS, and other detailed systems, plus knowing which edition to use as my baseline to get a similar amount of lethality/realism to what I had when I used GURPS or Fantasy Hero.

And yes, I live in a rural area (NW PA), so players can be hard to find at times. However, I have managed to "sell" GURPS for over two decades, so I know how to get around that issue. Using a form of D&D just makes it easier overall.

Next, classic D&D plays faster. Players get more done in a session compared to GURPS, Fantasy Hero, Mythras, or Harnmaster.

All of this doesn't mean I like OD&D with my Majestic Fantasy rules better; it means it now works just as well for my campaigns as GURPS or Harnmaster does.

There still remain downsides that can't worked around. GURPS, Fantasy Hero, D&D 5e, have more mechanics to flesh out characters with. And most players, for a long time, like to fiddle with the mechanical "bits" that make up their character. GURPS or Fantasy Hero is overkill for most players, but D&D 5e, I found, has a good balance in that regard.

As for me personally, ideally, I would like to use a skill-based system using 3D6 for resolution with some mechanical bits for characters. But I like to share settings and adventures more, and what I like the most to share are settings. And that far outweighs my desire to run a skill-based 3D6 system.

And I tried, using a Fudge/Fate based system I created as a start in the mid 2010s. Even if the issues with the bell curve of the 4dF dice roll didn't exist, I was thinking "What I am doing this for?". I made the OD&D based Majestic Fantasy RPG because it will help with sharing (and selling) my setting stuff. Online, it is not needed, but when trying to sell to stores or at conventions, having a system of your own is a plus. And it wasn't like I was doing a whole lot extra because this is what I used when running campaigns at home, online, or at conventions.

Sorry this wasn't a simple answer but these things rarely are.

 

[robertsconley]

Same. Almost went to the silver standard but my imaginations wants piles of gold...I'm odd though. I use a lot of electrum after seeing it was pretty common in the ancient world.

Yup the prevalence of electrum was something I didn't realize until later. Or the fact that coinage for the Western world didn't become a thing until the Persian Empire conquered Lydia, like their ideas, and issued it own darics and siglos. Even then it appears that it was mostly used just in the western satrapies.

 

[Acmegamer]

So why are you guys playing D&D when there are other games out there that do what you want already? Lack of players in the other games?

Not sure why the push back about certain mechanics and how we strongly disagree about them. It's not like we're talking about a total, partial or even light overhaul. We're talking about a mechanic here and there.

I'll point out that Gary Gygax himself would frequently point out that making the game your own and tossing a side a rule that you don't agree with was pretty common for Gary.

I could go and track down a bunch of quotes but I'll just point out Mark Carr's comments in the forward of the AD&D 1st Edition DMG.

"Use the written material as your foundation and inspiration, then
explore the creative possibilities you have in your own mind to make your game something special."
-Mike Carr
TSR Games & Rules Editor
16 May 1979

As I said there are amble quotes by Gary himself on that subject. Sure he also meandered all over the place at times but his overall point is to make the game your own. So I'm not sure why you have such an issue with some of us who feel that the coins and weight are ridiculous and that we have issues with infravision & ultravision.

Tweaking both isn't rule breaking by a long shot nor is it a call to play another game. It's not like folks are calling for the classes to be re-designed, levels changed, THAC0 removed etc.

I wish more people were comfortable trying out other systems, in my area there does appear to be a push back towards anything that isn't organized play. Meaning that Adventurer's League (DnD 5e), Pathfinder Society (Pathfinder 2e), Starfinders Society (Starfinder 1e), are the overwhelming game play at the game shop I go to.

Other nights are taken up with the various versions of Games Workshops wargames. Age of Sigmar, Warhammer etc etc. WHich has two nights if I recall. Monday night is board game night. Otherwise the other nights are packed with previously mentioned organized play for AL, PS, SS.

There is a game that's managed to snag a table for Tuesday night for DCC rpg, but due to the drive, traffic etc (110/120 miles around trip depending which route I can take) just became a burn out for me to get 2 to 3 hours of gameplay. I spent more time on the road than actually playing and putting a ton of mileage on my vehicles.

So yeah, I honestly don't have any real choices and mostly at this point am reading games and not playing much of anything but the occasional mmorpg or mud.

 

[sharps54]

Not sure why the push back about certain mechanics and how we strongly disagree about them. It's not like we're talking about a total, partial or even light overhaul. We're talking about a mechanic here and there.

I'll point out that Gary Gygax himself would frequently point out that making the game your own and tossing a side a rule that you don't agree with was pretty common for Gary.

I could go and track down a bunch of quotes but I'll just point out Mark Carr's comments in the forward of the AD&D 1st Edition DMG.

"Use the written material as your foundation and inspiration, then
explore the creative possibilities you have in your own mind to make your game something special."
-Mike Carr
TSR Games & Rules Editor
16 May 1979

As I said there are amble quotes by Gary himself on that subject. Sure he also meandered all over the place at times but his overall point is to make the game your own. So I'm not sure why you have such an issue with some of us who feel that the coins and weight are ridiculous and that we have issues with infravision & ultravision.

Tweaking both isn't rule breaking by a long shot nor is it a call to play another game. It's not like folks are calling for the classes to be re-designed, levels changed, THAC0 removed etc.

I wish more people were comfortable trying out other systems, in my area there does appear to be a push back towards anything that isn't organized play. Meaning that Adventurer's League (DnD 5e), Pathfinder Society (Pathfinder 2e), Starfinders Society (Starfinder 1e), are the overwhelming game play at the game shop I go to.

Other nights are taken up with the various versions of Games Workshops wargames. Age of Sigmar, Warhammer etc etc. WHich has two nights if I recall. Monday night is board game night. Otherwise the other nights are packed with previously mentioned organized play for AL, PS, SS.

There is a game that's managed to snag a table for Tuesday night for DCC rpg, but due to the drive, traffic etc (110/120 miles around trip depending which route I can take) just became a burn out for me to get 2 to 3 hours of gameplay. I spent more time on the road than actually playing and putting a ton of mileage on my vehicles.

So yeah, I honestly don't have any real choices and mostly at this point am reading games and not playing much of anything but the occasional mmorpg or mud.

I never said, or don’t think I said, house ruling was wrong or broke the game. I’m aware Gary didn’t use a lot of the rules himself. For me, and ymmv, I’d rather play a game as designed and if it doesn’t do what I want I’ll play one that does. I’m kinda sick of people pitching games with a page, normally more, of houserules when we are playing 3 hour online sessions. Again just me, I’m not telling anyone else how to play.

Thank you for the answer.

 

[robertsconley]

I never said, or don’t think I said, house ruling was wrong or broke the game. I’m aware Gary didn’t use a lot of the rules himself. For me, and ymmv, I’d rather play a game as designed and if it doesn’t do what I want I’ll play one that does. I’m kinda sick of people pitching games with a page, normally more, of houserules when we are playing 3 hour online sessions. Again just me, I’m not telling anyone else how to play.

In my defense, when I went that route, I just made an entire rulebook.



However, my friend Joethelawyer did not go that route for his AD&D 2e campaign, and thus, we have a 13-page document to wade through.

 

[TJS]

I think overall Encumbrance falls into a category of rules that are something of a pain because in many cases they are not used enough to feel worth the effort, but when you want them and they're not there it can feel annoying.

Obviously, this is not the case if it really matters every session for carrying loot out of dungeons or something like that. But if you don't need it until suddenly the PCs are fording a river and you want to know how weighed down they are then it's a pain because everyone's ignored it until now, or because everyone's been tracking it pointlessly until now (or a mixture of the two depending on the player.)

 

[Acmegamer]

I never said, or don’t think I said, house ruling was wrong or broke the game. I’m aware Gary didn’t use a lot of the rules himself. For me, and ymmv, I’d rather play a game as designed and if it doesn’t do what I want I’ll play one that does. I’m kinda sick of people pitching games with a page, normally more, of houserules when we are playing 3 hour online sessions. Again just me, I’m not telling anyone else how to play.

Thank you for the answer.

I want to apologize though for what feels like on my part of not getting your main question and instead focusing on pushing back at you. The question was legitimate and that's why I answered it. I just wish I had edited and re-worded some of the first part of the post. heh.

 

[arjunstc]

It occurs to me that 10 coins = 1 pound can be an abstraction, in that 1 "coin" here may represent a number of actual physical coins; but the price of goods is also pegged to the "coin". It's still a ridiculously large amount of weight to have to carry around to buy bread though...

In my own game I use a silver standard, and while notionally it is not decimal-based, mechanically we still use decimal-based accounting. Also my "gold pieces" is not actually a gold coin, but a larger silver coin of higher purity compared to the "silver pieces".

 

[Nobby-W]

I don't think anyone's upset. We all get the chance to change the little bits we don't like.

I actually prefer to not use coin much at all as 'treasure', although I would never say that someone who likes to salt their dungeons with 1000lb piles of coins is wrong, I just don't care for it myself. It is entirely correct that it mitigates for its own particular brand of problem solving.

There is one data point on record about sovereigns from Henry VII's reign where there's an order to mint 96lb of gold into sovereigns. That was the supply of gold coinage for the whole kingdom for a year.

At the height of sovereign production just before WWI, the annual mintage figures sat in the range of 200-300 tons.

1000lb of silver might be plausible - that would be enough to equip a couple of dozen knights and supporting troops and put them into the field - one could envisage transactions in which that much silver changed hands. You could do an adventure centred around recovering a shipment of silver that went missing. Move on a bit later to the pirates on the high seas era, and there are records of Spanish galleons being attacked and captured with 80+ tons of silver, but silver was much more plentiful in the new world than it was in medieval Europe.

Silver ingots (i.e. bars made from molten silver poured into a mould) were certainly used, but a lot of silver was minted into trade coinage. Trade coins were silver bullion minted into large coins for convenience, the first of which were known as Thalers. Thalers were just under 4cm across and weighed a little under an ounce, and formed the model for a lot of other trade coinage such as 8 reales and trade dollars. If you want large coins these are perhaps a better archetype.

Pieces of 8: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_dollar

Trade dollars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dollar

Thalers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaler

Gold trade coins were also produced, of which the most widely produced in the era were Ducats. Ducats became an informal common currency system with about 30 polities minting ducats to the same specification. However, they were quite small, about 2cm across and weighing 3.5g or so each.

Ducat - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Nobby-W]

Fun fact: Charles IV of Spain has the most punchable face of any monarch in history.

Change my mind.

 

[Nobby-W]

Same. Almost went to the silver standard but my imaginations wants piles of gold...I'm odd though. I use a lot of electrum after seeing it was pretty common in the ancient world.

Electrum was quite common as naturally occurring gold has a fair amount of silver in it - also, it doesn't take a lot of silver in the alloy to significantly lift the colour of gold; less than 1% can make a very substantial difference to the colour of 90%-ish alloys. Most circulated gold coinage was about 90% gold, and relatively small variations in the silver content can make quite a substantial difference to the colour.

 

[AsenRG]

Fun fact: Charles IV of Spain has the most punchable face of any monarch in history.

Change my mind.

View attachment 81678

By Herkle, you're right!

 

[sharps54]

I want to apologize though for what feels like on my part of not getting your main question and instead focusing on pushing back at you. The question was legitimate and that's why I answered it. I just wish I had edited and re-worded some of the first part of the post. heh.

It’s all good, I’m not sure all my posts in this thread are totally rational or level headed. Sometimes a little push back is a good thing

 

[ffilz]

I never said, or don’t think I said, house ruling was wrong or broke the game. I’m aware Gary didn’t use a lot of the rules himself. For me, and ymmv, I’d rather play a game as designed and if it doesn’t do what I want I’ll play one that does. I’m kinda sick of people pitching games with a page, normally more, of houserules when we are playing 3 hour online sessions. Again just me, I’m not telling anyone else how to play.

Thank you for the answer.

While I aspire to run games as written, often a game is close but not quite. So rather than throw out the game entirely, I come up with a few house rules.

Burning Wheel I run as written, though I would potentially have a document that lays out the options being used (magic systems, character stocks available, guidelines on character generation). Actually, that points out, that unless you only use the core book, it's hard to run a game without a "house rules" document.

For OD&D, I have about a page, maybe two. Much of it is clarifications of interpretations, but it includes a death save rule, specifies what is being used from later supplements, and a few other bits.

For RuneQuest, most of my house rules document is my enhancement of the previous experience system. I do handle crits and impaling weapons differently. I also specify what bits from RQ2 I am using as well as a few other rules collected from other sources. A few other minor bits here and there (how experience rolls are made, hit point calculation). But other than the crit/impale rule, if someone sat down at my table with the RQ1 rule book, they would not be too surprised.

Originally Cold Iron I prided myself on being the first game I could run basically as written. OK, I dropped a couple annoying spells. Then I changed the skill system. And later, at the encouragement of one of my players, I wrote up all the combat rulings I had made. And now I'm slowly beating that into shape to publish my own version, Cold Iron Blackmarsh Adventures. In one sense it's hundreds of pages of house rules... That said, to tie back to this thread... I use the encumbrance system as written.

Oh, actually, all of the above games, I use the encumbrance system as written. Yea, if I run OD&D, coins a heavy...

But the truth is almost any RPG campaign is going to accumulate some house rules. They are going to evolve out of rulings that are made at the table. Slowly some of those rulings will coalesce into a house rule, whether written down or not.

 

[robertsconley]

For OD&D, I have about a page, maybe two. Much of it is clarifications of interpretations, but it includes a death save rule, specifies what is being used from later supplements, and a few other bits.

It is impossible to run OD&D without some clarification.

 

[sharps54]

It is impossible to run OD&D without some clarification.

I think people are getting caught up between the idea of long term campaigns and just playing adventures and one shots. Sure the DM will make command decisions, that’s their job, but there really isn’t even a need to record them. There are a number of people out there that are perfectly happy making decisions on the spot and not being forced to make that same decision the next time it comes up. I realize that doesn’t work for everyone but there are a vast number of playstyles out there not one true way.

 

[ffilz]

I think people are getting caught up between the idea of long term campaigns and just playing adventures and one shots. Sure the DM will make command decisions, that’s their job, but there really isn’t even a need to record them. There are a number of people out there that are perfectly happy making decisions on the spot and not being forced to make that same decision the next time it comes up. I realize that doesn’t work for everyone but there are a vast number of playstyles out there not one true way.

Sure, but if one GM wants to note those rulings in a house rules document, that is a valid play style also.

And even for one shots, a GM might still choose to have house rules if they regularly run one shots for a particular game (maybe at conventions). Some GMs may even make specific house rules for one shots to make the game run better as a one shot. Others may write down scenario specific house rules for one shots. Maybe you run a one shot with a variant set of character classes or some other significant rule variation that fits more in genre and setting than core mechanics.

 

[sharps54]

Sure, but if one GM wants to note those rulings in a house rules document, that is a valid play style also.

And even for one shots, a GM might still choose to have house rules if they regularly run one shots for a particular game (maybe at conventions). Some GMs may even make specific house rules for one shots to make the game run better as a one shot. Others may write down scenario specific house rules for one shots. Maybe you run a one shot with a variant set of character classes or some other significant rule variation that fits more in genre and setting than core mechanics.

I’m not saying any of that is bad but the idea of not doing that isn’t bad either. There is a prevailing idea, not a universal one, that a DM should record their rulings so they can make the same ones each time, this isn’t the way everyone likes to play. I think the idea that some people don’t feel the need to have that consistency causes them to looked down on in this hobby by certain others.

 

[robertsconley]

I think people are getting caught up between the idea of long term campaigns and just playing adventures and one shots. Sure the DM will make command decisions, that’s their job, but there really isn’t even a need to record them. There are a number of people out there that are perfectly happy making decisions on the spot and not being forced to make that same decision the next time it comes up. I realize that doesn’t work for everyone but there are a vast number of playstyles out there not one true way.

I literally mean that OD&D can't be run without some clarifications. It was written as an aid for an audience that knows how to run a wargame campaign and did medieval wargaming. So a bunch of stuff was not included as Gygax assumed his audience already knew about that stuff or had access to other systems like Chainmail, that covered those things.

 

[sharps54]

I literally mean that OD&D can't be run without some clarifications. It was written as an aid for an audience that knows how to run a wargame campaign and did medieval wargaming. So a bunch of stuff was not included as Gygax assumed his audience already knew about that stuff or had access to other systems like Chainmail, that covered those things.

And yet people did it, pretty amazing huh?

 

[sharps54]

Or is your position there there isn’t any case of a non wargamer buying the LBBs and successfully running a game in the mid 70’s?

Not a single one?

 

[arjunstc]

Fun fact: Charles IV of Spain has the most punchable face of any monarch in history.

Change my mind.

View attachment 81678

Is that a reverse-Habsburg jaw?

 

[ffilz]

And yet people did it, pretty amazing huh?

Sure, anyone can pick up the rules, and if determined, can puzzle out a way to run the game. Their neighbor who did the same thing may come to different conclusions. Each of them may or may not be aware that some of the ways they interpreted things are just one way of interpreting the text. Written, or at least explicitly verbalized, house rules rise in importance as different play groups mingle and discover their different interpretations.

 

[robertsconley]

And yet people did it, pretty amazing huh?

Or is your position there there isn’t any case of a non wargamer buying the LBBs and successfully running a game in the mid 70’s?

Not a single one?

Not sure why you think that is a relevant point to anything I just said.

What happened was that OD&D campaigns quickly became idiocentric. Some areas developed a regional consensus based on a popular gaming club or similar organizations like the Los Angeles Science Fiction Society.

You can see what these rules looked like in the original writes up of tournament dungeons like one used in Gen Con X (Of Skulls and Scrapfaggot Green).

 

[Nobby-W]

Is that a reverse-Habsburg jaw?

Not sure how much Habsburg ancestry he had, but certainly not as inbred as Charles II.

 

[CRKrueger]

So why are you guys playing D&D when there are other games out there that do what you want already? Lack of players in the other games?

I’m not. Although a friend is talking about a AD&D/AS&SH game. He’d be using an old AD&D price list we put together back in the 80’s cribbed from Rolemaster/Harn/etc.