Troll Lord Games

Do you CK's require encumbrance to be tracked and if so how do you verify that your players are following the encumbrance rules. Or do you just ignore encumbrance all together.

I'm running a campaign where the characters are deep in unexplored jungles exploring ancient ruins. They have hired some porters and will need to port much of what they find out of the jungle which is several days journey. I'm wondering how I should handle encumbrance.

Also I was just curious how many CK's require spell components in their game or if it's just assumed that spell components are a benign item assumed to be carried by spell casters.

Groups i played with in the 90's usually required spell components to be carried and collected and the component quantities tracked. The groups i play with today though usually just assume that the caster has these in unlimited quantities, or they don't require them at all, forgoing material components all together. Or it's just assumed components are taken care of.

Once again my players are miles away from civilization and do not have ready access to expendibles like components and ammunition.

Nal

I use what I call logical encumbrance. A character can carry a certain amount of stuff, and if it starts to get weird, like "oh, I have this 25 foot ladder right here with me... on my back" then I say "sorry, no, that's in the cart back at the fort." I don't nickel-and-dime the game since I don't want to play Abacus: The Accounting.

Regarding spell components... I do pretty much the same thing. Expensive components, or things that are weird, have to be written down and marked off as used when used. Common crap, like guano, well... BFD.

In a situation where supplies are extremely limited, as they are in this case, I would ask for a copy of the character sheet, make notes, and then during the course of the game sidebar things on my copy of the sheet, so each arrow fired is recorded (though, I do allow a 15% chance of recovery for arrows that hit -- those that missed are gone.) Should something come up where the two disagree, make a ruling and then discuss it with that player later.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

In my games, I require encumbrance to be tracked. This is because I think it's important to guage valuable items on long treks in the wilderness or hostile lands. Plus, I throw some bonus XPs in from time to time to those who do track encumbrance well.

As for spell components, for the mundane/generic components I do not have them keep track of such things. All that is required is the PC mark on the character sheet that they have a spell component pouch or some other container. Additionally, all I ask as CK is for the players to spend 1-10gp or so on refilling standard components each time they get back to civilization. When components are more that 10gp, or a very unusual item I do have them track such things. It's not as easy as you might think to find those weird spell components. Things like gem spell compenets of 11gp+ are most certainly required to be tracked.

~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Like Serlean, I eyeball encumbrance generally. If it seems to get out of hand, I'd call for a 'gear inspection' and see how it adds up.

I never got around to it in my game, but with the players using a mule and cart much of the time, it wasn't an issue. We never had a problem with the 'backpack of many things'.

I think players should work out a general encumbrance BTB for their char sheet, just so we all know what their base encumbrance level is, for those pesky dex or str related SEIGE checks.

As far as spell components go, in standard settings (town to dungeon, back to town; or town to wilderness, back to town) I don't track generic components. I assume the wizard has a bag of lint for sleep spells or whatever, and can buy or get more in town. If the spell description calls for special or expensive components, then I would track them.

In the case of Naelex's 'way out back in the jungle, not seeing civilization for weeks or months at a time' adventure (which I am playing in), I think the bat-guano and feather type components are common enough, but it should be tracked for things readily UNAVAILABLE in such a setting.

I kind of run it like Omote, though at times I'm a tad less concerned with it, since I use weight vs encumberance.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

I try to favor a more common sense approach to encumbrance. I look at the character's physical attributes and the proposed list and see if they make sense.

In terms of material components, I assume they have mundane/common ones in stock. I like the "spend x gp when you go to town to replenish your stocks" system, and valuable items (>10 gp) must be tracked.

Serleran pretty much covers how I like to handle the issues as well.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

I usually follow along Omote's & Serleran's way. I usually trust my players to stay within their encumbrance limits. If they start going overboard on carrying everything they can, I'll reign them in.

On spell components, I just charge a restocking fee when they go back to town, unless it is a rare or expensive item.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/

I like Aladars approach.

When I GM it is not my concern whether the players have tracked their encumbrance to the tee, or if the mage in the party has the silver butterfly wings required to cast such and such a spell. It is my concern to perhaps use these things as plot devices, but unless I do, the players are just wasting time and energy tracking it.

I figure it is up to the player to insert as much detail as they wish or don't wish. if the group has porters then the question comes are we tracking their encumbrance also? The whole reason for porters I would think would be to abstract crunchy details unless it pertains to the game or plot.

I tell my folks to track their encumbrance because it will come up at some random time...balancing on a broken beam for instance.

I think it has a place when it adds to the game and has relevance. If components become a part of the plot, or reason you are in a jungle then fine. If it is just another hoop to jump thru then why bother?

Fighters have never had to track their oil and whet stone use, or replace a broken armor strap so why hinder casters with such details?

If the quest is to find the rare "Vesuvivine" or the berries of the Gaius plant that only grows in jungles glades then cool. that can be inserted as a vehicle to drive the plot.

If it is just another thing to track...then i find it rather "encumbering".

So in a nutshell does it add flavor or add burden to the gaming experience? Many groups are different in desired style. Is your group an action jackson group of the type that tracks every minute detail?

What do the players at your table think?

Therein lies your answer.
_________________
'Nosce te Ipsum' -Delphic Maxim

'Follow your bliss.' -Joseph Campbell

Omote wrote:
In my games, I require encumbrance to be tracked. This is because I think it's important to guage valuable items on long treks in the wilderness or hostile lands. Plus, I throw some bonus XPs in from time to time to those who do track encumbrance well.

This is my situation. The PC's are miles away from any type of civilization in a hostile jungle. There's a lot of what if's. Normally i wouldn't emphasize encumbrance so much but the environment and situation warrant it.

I'm kind of torn between allowing them to do as they will and requiring them to track their encumbrance due to the situation. I already have an NPC record for the porters and what they will be able to carry reasonably.

I think i'll just mention how important it is to track weight within reason. Then when a situation arises i'll check the character sheet and see how weighted down the pc is.

Thanks for all the replies, much appreciated.

Sir Osis of Liver wrote:
In terms of material components, I assume they have mundane/common ones in stock. I like the "spend x gp when you go to town to replenish your stocks" system, and valuable items (>10 gp) must be tracked.

This is perfect. I don't want to create caster accountants but i would like it to factor in somewhat especially since the PC's are many days away from acquiring components using the normal methods.

Joe wrote:
I tell my folks to track their encumbrance because it will come up at some random time...balancing on a broken beam for instance.

Exactly what i'm thinking except i'm leaning more towards "What if the characters have to run full speed through the diverse terrain of the jungle while being pursued by a tribe of lizard folk." Not that i'm planning that. I'd hate to have to call for an encumbrance check and find someone loaded down with all sorts of goodies.

Thanks for all the ideas and info!

Nal

Naleax wrote:
This is perfect. I don't want to create caster accountants but i would like it to factor in somewhat especially since the PC's are many days away from acquiring components using the normal methods.

Thanks,

Nal

For your situation, though, my system kinda needs some tweaking. My system works great if the party is near their home base. Stuck away from civilization, where there's noplace to go buy new materials, makes things much more complicated. If you're dealing with plant materials, no problem. If it's even some things from woodland animals, fine. But more exotic materials? That's a toughie. If they're small amounts, then they have several days (at least) worth of castings on their possession. But then what?

One of the defaults I use that if the PC has a spell component pouch, it is good for 10 uses of their consumable base components at the weight given. Of course the more exotic components they have to list, but encumberance/ weight-wise it tends to be pretty negligible. Equipment needed to do casting is another thing altogether. This is tracked completely separate from the components.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

I keep track of encumbrance. I think it's important enough to. I've been debating getting rid of the EV system (in favor of the d20 Str = weight allowed), but I haven't yet.

As far as spell components go, I don't keep track of the cheap and common ones. If I feel a component is either going to hard to find or one that cost a bit of coin, I will make the player track it down and/or purchase it and keep stock of what they have.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

LD, those two statements can be seen as contradictory.

For example, say a spell component is a lump of lead, weighing at 3 pounds, with an EV of 1, by itself. If you're strictly following the rules for encumbrance, you naturally are also keeping track of spell components, as each, technically, has its own value... even if it takes 100,000,000,000 of them to get to 1 EV.

You've been eating too much pie. Need more orc.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

I take the common sense approach to encumbrance. For spell components, I only worry about expensive or exotic ones.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

I track both. I track food and water too. I see it as part and parcel of "old school" gaming. This is not to criticise anyone elses game, it is just how our group likes to play. I will explain why.

I see encumbrance as one of the many tactical decisions a party has to make- travel light and fast and live off their wits, or come packing with all the awkwardness and problems hefting so much gear around might impose. Or strike a balance. Straight away they are making decisons- what is important to my character, how would he go about this? It makes already a point of difference perhaps between a wild elf who wants to travel light and a dwarf who wants to take his world on his back like a snail.

This straight away creates an atmosphere of logical choice and consequence, action and repurcussion I feel helps ground players to the realities of the world -they know if they are following logical rules, then the game world should too, so if they spot something out of whack it can be a clue without me having to make it obvious or resort to ability checks (which I almost never do for such things, my players must use their own nous).

If players get used to every inconvenienced getting "magicked" away like that they can get so thye kind of expect that from the game world and miss clues (maybe a dungeon has no food or toilets or beds, a clue its inhabitants are undead but in a world such things don't get tracked it may not seem as odd).

I track components and amounts thereof. Sure PC's can stock up with 6 spells worth but I like the choices it puts to a mage when he has used up 2 on the road to the dungeon, 2 more in a battle and then has to really weigh up when he uses his next ones as they may be his last.

The mere use and rationing of resources in this manner can add drama and complexity and another strategic level to a game.

It can become a venue for PC's to get creative an improvise in finding/using and storing things or add creepy elements and remind them that the world doesn't stop when they turn their backs (maybe they come up with the idea of caches of found items at strategic points in a dungeon, then maybe something can meddle with their caches and so on).

Isn't drama heightened when the PC's have to take a risk and seek out fresh water whilst evading that orc band?

Or when, miles from nowhere, they have no other choice but to barter for components with that hag in the woods?

Or you get to bring to life the old joke about not having to run faster than the troll, just faster than the overloaded fighter next to you?

It gives game support to the real life difference in strategy of lightly armed hit and run types vs walking fortress types. There is no difference between light and heavy troop types and their methods without encumbrance. SOme of the classic historical match ups lose their context.

I track those things because I think it adds to the fun. It just seems a bit computer gamey if not done.

I have had one person leave my group as he felt it was just unfair I tracked such things and I just made everything harder, which the rest of us kind of liked about it.

Nothing says realism like getting attacked from below when using the john. (and yes this did happen...never laugh at giant centipedes)
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

Naleax wrote:
This is my situation. The PC's are miles away from any type of civilization in a hostile jungle. There's a lot of what if's. Normally i wouldn't emphasize encumbrance so much but the environment and situation warrant it.

I'm kind of torn between allowing them to do as they will and requiring them to track their encumbrance due to the situation. I already have an NPC record for the porters and what they will be able to carry reasonably.

I think i'll just mention how important it is to track weight within reason. Then when a situation arises i'll check the character sheet and see how weighted down the pc is.


Exactly what i'm thinking except i'm leaning more towards "What if the characters have to run full speed through the diverse terrain of the jungle while being pursued by a tribe of lizard folk." Not that i'm planning that. I'd hate to have to call for an encumbrance check and find someone loaded down with all sorts of goodies.

Thanks for all the ideas and info!

Nal

Why would you hate for that to happen? That would be a perfect thing to happen to the stupid city person dumb enough to carry all that in the jungle.

So instead of asserting it as a rule they must adhere to use it as a plot device.

Mention how hot they get and all the water they are drinking. Mention the way their boots dig deep into the mud and their backs are aching. Make them scramble for cover or have to climb and have their sweaty hands slip in grip.

If after your original rule of "keep track of your own encumbrance" and all the narrative clues as to how light travel is best, then they deserve to become the next cannibal stew.

Use it as a plot device and when it comes up in the game to find that the character is encumbered, or as likely in my case, never bothered to even write down the weight, then they deserve whatever game results happen.

Thats why it's called ADVENTURE
_________________
'Nosce te Ipsum' -Delphic Maxim

'Follow your bliss.' -Joseph Campbell

I track encumbrance, though I ditched the entire encumbrance system as written and replaced it with something a bit more standard.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

zarathustra wrote:
I track both. I track food and water too. I see it as part and parcel of "old school" gaming. This is not to criticise anyone elses game, it is just how our group likes to play. I will explain why.

I see encumbrance as one of the many tactical decisions a party has to make- travel light and fast and live off their wits, or come packing with all the awkwardness and problems hefting so much gear around might impose. Or strike a balance. Straight away they are making decisons- what is important to my character, how would he go about this? It makes already a point of difference perhaps between a wild elf who wants to travel light and a dwarf who wants to take his world on his back like a snail.

This straight away creates an atmosphere of logical choice and consequence, action and repurcussion I feel helps ground players to the realities of the world -they know if they are following logical rules, then the game world should too, so if they spot something out of whack it can be a clue without me having to make it obvious or resort to ability checks (which I almost never do for such things, my players must use their own nous).

If players get used to every inconvenienced getting "magicked" away like that they can get so thye kind of expect that from the game world and miss clues (maybe a dungeon has no food or toilets or beds, a clue its inhabitants are undead but in a world such things don't get tracked it may not seem as odd).

I totally agree with this. I played with a pretty old school group in the 90's we all grew out of our juvenile games of the 80's and were in college together. We always tracked encumbrance and spell components and it definately made the world seem much more real to me. Casters were always on the lookout for components. We were all very immersed and kept good records.

Of course we were all in college and had tons of spare time to devote to roleplaying often playing 12 hour marathon sessions on the weekend and even some shorter sessions on the weekdays.

I'm a working man now and can only devote a few hours a week to gaming and the same goes for my gaming peers. Encumbrance spell components have never really been tracked and it feels very video gamish. I can also say that shopping in town is just fast tracked and not dealt with. No bartering with merchants, no engaging of town NPC's its all just whited out and then back to the adventure. This might be due to the limited time we have or lack of interest. I really miss this realism as a gamer, especially when it's made interesting by the GM and Players. I to think it's important for the players to track these things reliably.

Glad to see at least someone tracks these.

Joe wrote:
If after your original rule of "keep track of your own encumbrance" and all the narrative clues as to how light travel is best, then they deserve to become the next cannibal stew.

Use it as a plot device and when it comes up in the game to find that the character is encumbered, or as likely in my case, never bothered to even write down the weight, then they deserve whatever game results happen.

Absolutely. Good point Joe.

I don't track these things for several reasons.

One: My players take steps to be "realistic" on their own. So they look at what they have listed and if they can't think of how they can realistically carry it, they buy additional pack mules, etc... to justify having it with them.

Two: Magic makes many supplies unnecessary. Goodberries, Create Food, Create Water, and even that 0 level spell that protects them from atmospheric extremes for 24 hours per casting. So carrying various amounts of food, drink, and specialized clothing becomes unneeded.

Three: Magical gear can allow PC's to carry so much stuff, why bother tracking it? For example my second/third level group picked up a Type 2 Bag of Holding in the Cult of the Reptile God module. That carries 500 pounds of stuff.

Four: most magic item components are pretty easy to find. Spiders, spider webbing, grasshopper legs, dust, etc... can be found just about anywhere. In your room at the Inn, alongside the road your travelling, etc...

So when it gets down to it there is so little that would even need to be tracked, why bother?

Now if I was running a scenario where they would be away from such easy resupply, like the deep desert, then I would worry about it, if they do not have Teleport available to them. If they are powerful enough to have Teleport they can go anywhere they have ever been and resupply in relatively short order. Usually 2 days.

So most of the time, I just don't bother. When its new players, or they are going into an environment where they may not have access to resupply, such as deep desert/jungle/forest etc... for a prolonged period of time, like more than 10 days, I'll worry about it. Most of the time I have far more fun things to be concerned about, and so do the players.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Joe wrote:
Why would you hate for that to happen? That would be a perfect thing to happen to the stupid city person dumb enough to carry all that in the jungle.

So instead of asserting it as a rule they must adhere to use it as a plot device.

Mention how hot they get and all the water they are drinking. Mention the way their boots dig deep into the mud and their backs are aching. Make them scramble for cover or have to climb and have their sweaty hands slip in grip.

If after your original rule of "keep track of your own encumbrance" and all the narrative clues as to how light travel is best, then they deserve to become the next cannibal stew.

Use it as a plot device and when it comes up in the game to find that the character is encumbered, or as likely in my case, never bothered to even write down the weight, then they deserve whatever game results happen.

Thats why it's called ADVENTURE

I love this approach, if PC's wanna go to the jungle, let em experience the jungle warts and all, same for any unusual environment- it should be more evocative than simply a different set of monsters to play with.

I suppose some due to some spells and in higher level or higher magic campaigns the effects of such places would be more easily neutered but I like the idea of geographic features, terrain and environments being interesting challenges and encounters by themselves (waterfalls, deep gorges, swamps whatever), let alone with a few beasties thrown in or with the PC's trying to get piles of loot and equipment through such terrain.

I hadn't noticed the power of 0 lvl Endure Elements spell in C&C (system newb here) before. 24 hr duration is quite alot for a 0 lvl spell which renders so many potential challenges moot. May have to tinker with that... At least for non-druids.

It's funny, when I wrote up the EV system, I did it to try to make encumberance "easier" to track (heck, just look to StarSIEGE to see how much I try to keep encumberance "easy"). I thought by keeping numbers low and providing a method to quickly "eyeball" EVs not found on the chart, it would make for a faster way to track things. After all, you're never really adding more than single digits together, rather than tracking weights of things and such.

It's weird to me that people would rather track the large numbers that come with weight rather than smaller single digits which tries to model both weight and bulk... I mean with the EV system as written you're really looking at adding things up to 40 EV (56 for people with both STR and CON prime). Meanwhile, 3.5 has values going into the hundreds (up to 300 lbs. for STR 18). I mean, a Braod Sword, a Medium Steel Shield, and Plate Mail puts you at 9 EV right away... that's pretty quick to eyeball and you're not even Encumbered at that level. Meanwhile you'd instead have 68 lbs (which is a Medium Load in 3.5 for everyone with STR less than 16) if you were doing it "by weight". Heck, you'd need to have the table memorized to even know that you're burdened at 68 lbs....

Oh well... I'm not sure why I'm here making a case for something that is bascially a matter of opinion, but I just wanted to come to the defense of a system that was my best attempt to mechanize an "eyeball" Encumberence system and keep most of the large number accounting out.
_________________
discreteinfinity.com -- my little corner of the internet.

Author of StarSIEGE: Event Horizon -- Available now from Troll Lord Games!

cheeplives wrote:
It's funny, when I wrote up the EV system, I did it to try to make encumberance "easier" to track (heck, just look to StarSIEGE to see how much I try to keep encumberance "easy"). I thought by keeping numbers low and providing a method to quickly "eyeball" EVs not found on the chart, it would make for a faster way to track things. After all, you're never really adding more than single digits together, rather than tracking weights of things and such.

It's weird to me that people would rather track the large numbers that come with weight rather than smaller single digits which tries to model both weight and bulk... I mean with the EV system as written you're really looking at adding things up to 40 EV (56 for people with both STR and CON prime). Meanwhile, 3.5 has values going into the hundreds (up to 300 lbs. for STR 18). I mean, a Braod Sword, a Medium Steel Shield, and Plate Mail puts you at 9 EV right away... that's pretty quick to eyeball and you're not even Encumbered at that level. Meanwhile you'd instead have 68 lbs (which is a Medium Load in 3.5 for everyone with STR less than 16) if you were doing it "by weight". Heck, you'd need to have the table memorized to even know that you're burdened at 68 lbs....

Oh well... I'm not sure why I'm here making a case for something that is bascially a matter of opinion, but I just wanted to come to the defense of a system that was my best attempt to mechanize an "eyeball" Encumberence system and keep most of the large number accounting out.

Thanks for the insight. It's always nice to see the thought process that goes into something that can be abstract. For me, this system makes more sense than the previous attempts in other systems I've seen. It just seems more intuitive, and when I need to double check something my players are doing, it's a nice quick way to do that.

I track weapons, armor, treasure and food/water/sleeping gear in "stones"

A character can carry 10+2 for con prime+2 str prime

Stones arn't the english stones

1-h smallish weapons are 1 stone or a full quiver

1-h largish weapons (bastard sword, battle axe) are 2 stone

2-h weapons are 3 stones

Pole arms are 4

daggers are 0

Shield are 1-3

Armor 1-5

500 coins are 1 stone

One weeks food is 1 stone

2 days water is 1 stone

A back pack is 5 stone (but any item not covered above can be stowed in it)

It has the effect I want. Henchmen!

As far spell component I make wizards have 1 stone pouch, and only worry about expensive components.

cheeplives wrote:
It's funny, when I wrote up the EV system, I did it to try to make encumberance "easier" to track (heck, just look to StarSIEGE to see how much I try to keep encumberance "easy"). I thought by keeping numbers low and providing a method to quickly "eyeball" EVs not found on the chart, it would make for a faster way to track things. After all, you're never really adding more than single digits together, rather than tracking weights of things and such.

It's weird to me that people would rather track the large numbers that come with weight rather than smaller single digits which tries to model both weight and bulk... I mean with the EV system as written you're really looking at adding things up to 40 EV (56 for people with both STR and CON prime). Meanwhile, 3.5 has values going into the hundreds (up to 300 lbs. for STR 18). I mean, a Braod Sword, a Medium Steel Shield, and Plate Mail puts you at 9 EV right away... that's pretty quick to eyeball and you're not even Encumbered at that level. Meanwhile you'd instead have 68 lbs (which is a Medium Load in 3.5 for everyone with STR less than 16) if you were doing it "by weight". Heck, you'd need to have the table memorized to even know that you're burdened at 68 lbs....

Oh well... I'm not sure why I'm here making a case for something that is bascially a matter of opinion, but I just wanted to come to the defense of a system that was my best attempt to mechanize an "eyeball" Encumberence system and keep most of the large number accounting out.

I think your system is great. It's easy to use as you intended and it gives note of the fact that large objects even if light in weight can be difficult to carry. Love it.
_________________
Sir Dachda McKinty,

Margrave and Knight of Portlandia
Castles & Crusades Society

zombiehands wrote:
I track weapons, armor, treasure and food/water/sleeping gear in "stones"

A character can carry 10+2 for con prime+2 str prime

Stones arn't the english stones

1-h smallish weapons are 1 stone or a full quiver

1-h largish weapons (bastard sword, battle axe) are 2 stone

2-h weapons are 3 stones

Pole arms are 4

daggers are 0

Shield are 1-3

Armor 1-5

500 coins are 1 stone

One weeks food is 1 stone

2 days water is 1 stone

A back pack is 5 stone (but any item not covered above can be stowed in it)

It has the effect I want. Henchmen!

As far spell component I make wizards have 1 stone pouch, and only worry about expensive components.

You've almost exactly described the Encumbrance Rules as Written, but you're using broader categories rather than specific values for items.
_________________
discreteinfinity.com -- my little corner of the internet.

Author of StarSIEGE: Event Horizon -- Available now from Troll Lord Games!

cheep, I believe the biggest problem (except as noted below) with encumbrance comes when you attempt to model capacity objects. It's believable and realistic, but the math compared to the rest of the system and Castles & Crusades on the whole is a nightmare. For example, let's say you have a large barrel (EV9). Inside the chest you put the same bedroll (EV3), hammer (EV2), 50 nails (EV1), and one torch (EV1) from the example given in the book. By the RAW, the chest would have an EV of 15. By the original version of the rule the EV would be 12. Perhaps it's not as believable and realistic, but I would apply a -4 EV to the total contents of the chest rather than dividing by two. In this case, I happen to get the same answer. If we use your example that is supposed to be in the rulebook, the backpack (EV2(w)) and contents (EV7) would have a total EV of 5(w). When worn, this would reduce to EV4 since the two rules stack.

By the RAW, a large sack (EV10) with EV10 worth of items in it would have have a total of EV15. Using a -4 instead of dividing by two, the total would be EV16. That doesn't seem to be a significant difference to me.

The system does in fact work and can work well if tweaked just a bit. It just seems not to be explained too clearly. But cheep we have another problem, one not your doing. It involves Monsters & Treasure. Nowhere in that book is an EV value listed for anything.

What is the carrying capacity of a horse, mule, or donkey? Monsters & Treasure gives the carrying capacity in pounds. Because it's not given in terms of EV, horses, mules, and donkeys by the book cannot be used as beasts of burden because we do not know what the EV of these creatures are. To answer the question about this in Keeper Advice I had to take the system I use and base numbers off that.

Worse, there are no EV values for any of the treasure in Monsters & Treasure. This is a problem because now players don't have any way of knowing just how difficult the treasure will be to lug out of the dungeon. As established in AD&D and other D&D systems, magic items do not have any weight, but the encumbrance system isn't based on weight, but on mass and bulk. So these items actually do encumber a character carrying the stuff out of the dungeon. Sure, we can ad hoc a number based on the GP value of the item, but that would be woefully inaccurate at best, a kludge at worst.

I know I'm going to irritate or otherwise offend some people for what I'm going to say next, maybe even the Trolls themselves, but it has to be said.

While we've all gone through the various printings and picked out the various errors, this is the biggest errata yet. In order to fix this, a wholesale revision of Monsters & Treasure is going to be required, because Monsters & Treasures completely ignores the encumbrance system. A role playing system to not be consistent in its rules throughout its books is a role playing system that is going to struggle.

In fact, I believe the rules, or rather their inconsistent application, is part of the reason for the downward turn the forums are experiencing as of late. People buy the system, read through the system, try playing the system and then wonder "WTF" when they come across a problem. They ask questions here and the only answer that seems to be given is "make it up". For some things, making it up or "wing it" is a perfectly acceptable response, but for other things, like encumbrance, making it up simply isn't going to fly. All it does lead to are dissatisfied people and lots of used copies of the game on ebay as people gravitate to Swords & Wizardry, Labrynth Lord, or OSRIC.

Whether we like it or not, we need to call the next printing a new edition. The PHB in the most recent printing received some pretty substantial changes regarding the Illusionist and the Barbarian. Monsters & Treasure is going to need some pretty substantial changes to it in order to have encumbrance work properly throughout the game system. At the same time, the books need to be picked through and any inconsistencies within them addressed.

And this is wishful thinking on my part, but perhaps for this new edition, combine the PHB and M&T into one big book?
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

I don't have a problem with the encumbrance system. In fact when I figured it out I liked it. I simply prefer not to mess with encumbrance, period.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

It could be worded more clearly, don't you think?
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.