Some mechanisms (often ported from the old days) are putting the incentives in the wrong place - blog post discussion

[ichabod]

This seems like a perspective problem. Say encumbrance drops your speed by 10 feet. You don't want to track it because it's just a penalty involved, nothing positive. Fine: reduce everyone's base speed by 10 feet, but you get an extra 10 feet of movement if you're not encumbered. Functionally, it's the exact same situation. But now you want to track encumbrance because there's a bonus involved?

 

[payn]

In theory, I agree with the notion. However, I think there reaches a point where you convolute the system with a thousand piddly bonuses that players will take great pains to jump through every possible hoop. There is a point where I want focus to just be on playing the damn game and not the number crunching.

 

[practicalm]

The other trick is you could have traveling encumbrance and then fighting encumbrance where you drop your treasure while fighting. That makes it even harder for players to retreat but it does give something for the enemy to do, run and steal the player's packs.

 

[Yora]

I think the problem with encumbrance specifically is porting in part of the rules but not all of them. In TSR D&D the less encumbered you are the faster you could move. That was the benefit. That was also the part left behind.

As to the broader premise, yes, I agree. There should be both carrots and sticks in the rules. Though the modern version is only carrots and no sticks. Either way, if something matters enough to have subsystems for it, then it should provide at least a benefit. Advantage on perception checks in a brightly-lit room or some such.

The incentive is not just that you move faster. It's that when you move faster, you have fewer random encounters.

Encumbrance is only relevant when you have random encounters. And random encounters pose a serious risk.

Encumbrance is just one mechanic of a system of something like 10 different mechanics that all rely on each other to work. It's just that in recent games using the D&D label, that system no longer exist and you're just left with encumbrance existing all by itself in a void, serving no function.

 

[payn]

A lot of why these things have been dropped is due with the change in how the game is played. I think this carrot and stick design is old school skill play incentive. Where the PCs are really in a fantasy survival sim. Personally, I just look to systems that do it better than modern D&D.

OSR products like Forbidden Lands is a really good one. Water, food, and torches are tracked via supply die. If I am able to spend time collecting/making torches, I can max out my supply die at D10. When the situation arises where I need a torch, I roll a D10. On a 1 or 2, the die becomes D8 and so on. This is an elegant design that is easy to track and manage. I know what my odds are if I want to push my luck. Best part is its not a binary do or do not leaning into the game aspect.

When it comes to D&D, im full aboard the post-Hickman train. The game's scope has increased significantly. No longer are the PCs simply expected to dungeon delve and survive to get loot and become more powerful. It's no longer simply a survival sim. Now, the PCs are exploring long lost places, uncovering vast conspiracies, and making their mark on the setting and its people. Tracking minute items such as weight, light, and torches is besides the point (unless its specifically thee point in the adventure).

So, when it comes to encumbrance I think the modern answer is just to remove it entirely as opposed to adding back in a dozen items to penalize/incentivize the players if they are not skill playing correctly and/or smartly. Magic items are now optional so the need to strip the copper wire and tubing out of every dungeon is gone. If, for some reason, the PCs need to move heavy stuff because of the adventure, you deal with it then instead of every moment of the game. YMMV.

 

[Composer99]

The incentive is not just that you move faster. It's that when you move faster, you have fewer random encounters.

Encumbrance is only relevant when you have random encounters. And random encounters pose a serious risk.

Encumbrance is just one mechanic of a system of something like 10 different mechanics that all rely on each other to work. It's just that in recent games using the D&D label, that system no longer exist and you're just left with encumbrance existing all by itself in a void, serving no function.

I want to iterate on this, because I think there's something missing here - it's not just about avoiding random encounters. There's also a subtle push-your-luck play going on here!

Why are you encumbered, and therefore moving more slowly, and therefore at greater risk of random encounters and the risks they entail? Because you're carrying more stuff - most importantly, provisions and loot.

The reason encumbrance matters in classical dungeon-crawling play is because it is the source of the crucial gameplay decisions that players have to make in that style of play: are you willing to risk more random encounters in order to be better equipped against the other kinds of dangers the dungeon presents? How much loot are you going to try to take with you? Are you willing to risk more random encounters on the way back out so that you can haul more loot? Or are you instead going to be less prepared, and haul out less loot (perhaps a disappointingly lesser amount) in order to ablate the random encounter risks?

Because the point of classic play is to collect loot and bring it out of the dungeon, the encumbrance mechanic and its implications set up the push-your-luck play: you want to carry as much loot as you can, so maybe you push your luck and encumber yourself. The greater risk increases the tension and emotional stakes - and hence, the fun!

(Parenthetically, I should note that nothing about encumbrance driving the above play decisions requires that it be, say, pound-weight or coin-weight encumbrance! Even many OSR dungeon-crawlers these days have abandoned pound-weight or coin-weight measurements in favour of some other way of tracking encumbrance.)

Contrast this with heroic adventure play. In this kind of play, the risk versus reward balancing act that players have to consider is something completely different, and may well not have much to do with earning loot at all. It's probably more closely related to things like player character goals - what do you want, and what are you willing to give up to get it? - or heroic dilemmas - if you can't save everyone, who do you save? - or heroic quests - can you make it to the Temple of Doom in time to stop the conjuring of the Demon of Doom, and how will the actions you take increase or decrease your chances of success?

In heroic play, "how much can you carry on an ongoing basis?" is usually just not an interesting question with enjoyable gameplay coming out of it, and I don't think adding the complexity of a widget that makes tracking encumbrance worthwhile on a stand-alone basis is adding any depth to the actual focus gameplay.

If anything, the answer to encumbrance in modern D&D (arrant nonsense such as "games using the D&D label" notwithstanding) is to jettison it. If you absolutely have to include some kind of limitation in order to appeal to your own or your players' preferences as regards verisimilitude, use a simpler mechanic, always ensure the player characters have plentiful ways within the in-game fiction to haul piles of gear around, or, as suggested by @Crimson Longinus, just kind of handwave it as long as no one is trying to game the system.

(That being said, having read through the blog post linked in the OP, it strikes me that the game the original blogger is running is the kind of game where "how much can you carry on an ongoing basis?" - or perhaps, better worded "how valuable do you find it to over-burden yourself with stuff during any given phase of the adventure?" is a more interesting question that is actually driving gameplay! So it certainly makes sense that they want to have an encumbrance system with teeth - just different teeth, so it seems, than would have been biting on the player characters in classic D&D dungeon-crawling.)

 

[overgeeked]

This seems like a perspective problem. Say encumbrance drops your speed by 10 feet. You don't want to track it because it's just a penalty involved, nothing positive. Fine: reduce everyone's base speed by 10 feet, but you get an extra 10 feet of movement if you're not encumbered. Functionally, it's the exact same situation. But now you want to track encumbrance because there's a bonus involved?

Exactly. Players react poorly to sticks but love chasing carrots. The rested XP bonus in WoW used to be a penalty but players hated it. All they did was flip it to a bonus and players loved it. All the numbers were identical. It was all about perception.

The incentive is not just that you move faster. It's that when you move faster, you have fewer random encounters.

Encumbrance is only relevant when you have random encounters. And random encounters pose a serious risk.

Encumbrance is just one mechanic of a system of something like 10 different mechanics that all rely on each other to work. It's just that in recent games using the D&D label, that system no longer exist and you're just left with encumbrance existing all by itself in a void, serving no function.

Very true. The other major system torn out is XP for gold. So tracking your encumbrance was incredibly important. You can only carry so much XP. Do you want to waste that space on food and torches?

 

[tetrasodium]

This seems like a perspective problem. Say encumbrance drops your speed by 10 feet. You don't want to track it because it's just a penalty involved, nothing positive. Fine: reduce everyone's base speed by 10 feet, but you get an extra 10 feet of movement if you're not encumbered. Functionally, it's the exact same situation. But now you want to track encumbrance because there's a bonus involved?

It's not just that. Used to be there were 2 thresholds. The first one was a low threshold that allowed a basic adventuring gear load out that fit your build and strength score but it was tight enough that trying to kitchen sink everything could result in going over with your magic items and various consumables. That one has a small but useful enough benefit for staying under (or you move faster). Then the second one was for when you were trying to carry everything plus the kitchen sink out of a dungeon or something but had some nasty teeth that would make even a minor encounter noteworthy.

5e only has the second threshold and first cost so you see none of the good benefits to play choices.

 

[ichabod]

5e only has the second threshold and first cost so you see none of the good benefits to play choices.

But my point is that whether it's a good benefit or a bad cost is purely your perspective. If you change your perspective it's all good benefit or it's all bad cost.

 

[overgeeked]

Two relevant videos on the topic from a video game POV.