Resource Management, or How I Learned To Stop Worrying About Rations and Love Mana

This is the TTRPG forum, not the DnD one.
I missed that. My bad.

Secondly, this thread is mostly about trying to understand  why amateurs love to think about tactics instead of logistics.
My bad. I focused on the “I think ration counting sucks” theme, rather than the WHY do you think that question.

Play culture has just as much of a hand in making logistics less important than rules designers have, moreso I think. So it's not just a rules issue
Agree.

However, I would like to know your view on us 'proud amateurs' since it might give some insights I haven't considered.
I think what you said in the original post was close to answering your own question.

Namely, it can be tedious and accounting-like. Most folks would rather get on with other aspects of the story. Spectacle and splashy stuff, not simulationist grubbing over details.

My favorite D&D is low level, when you’re poor, poorly equipped, and are in editions without unlimited cantrips.

My favorite war novel: The Things They Carried - Wikipedia

Guessing you would prefer other kinds of stories.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I actually do like some of the systems that make “consumable management” a somewhat abstracted thing, like Load in FITD or similar in Stonetop. Mainly because in those cases it’s something which feeds back into space for interesting moment to moment consequences and play. Or they’re usable as fictional positioning - you went out in summer with a Heavy Load and Hot armor? Cool, what do you do when the sun is beating down on you and beasts are howling in the distance and your sweat is bleeding through your padding.

Like, that’s an interesting situation. I’m totally down to track stuff when it can add drama and moment to moment intensity; not when it’s just “oops we need more arrows.”
 

I like resource management at the level of Ironsworn’s Supply trait. It’s on a 1-5 scale and covers most consumables. What’s interesting is that you sometimes have the option and sometimes have to lose some of it in combats going badly, injury, travel mishaps, and the like. And it’s included as a consequence in the description of various moves - you don’t roll separately for in almost any situation. That integration and simplicity combine to make it something that feels like no special burden to use and interesting in outcomes and challenges when it comes up.

No implication here that anyone should feel an obligation to like it. I’m already not playing with y’all, you should please your own tables. :)
 

But I don’t see why everything must be random generation.
Seem like I have been unclear. Let me clarify. Everything do not need to be random generated. Indeed the meat of the game style I described is typically predetermined location information. The method of "generation" of this is irrelevant. It could be random, but most often it is the GM or a third party designing it intelligently before players make contact with it. However for there to be the sense of a qualified gamble there need to be some notion of randomness involved, and where the players has some ground to reason around the odds.

I also want to add that what I described was the kind of scenario where I personally would very much like detailed rations to be tracked. You are outlining some other scenarios where food is clearly important to the game, but where I would prefer to use other mechanism than ration tracking to account for it in a TTRPG context.

For instance in the siege scenario I would likely have preferred some abstract series of clock ticking down to various bad stuff that alters the situation (for instance: tight rationing -> civilians start fighting over what is left -> nothing is left -> people start dying of hunger)

The wilderness survival scenario also typically triggers first when traditional ration have run out. For that situation I think I would again want to track the "food" state as an abstracted nutritional stat, that slowly ticks down and reduces the effectiveness of the characters, but that can be replenished on successes related to gathering food.

The goal would be to reduce the spreadsheet feel of the game. Computer games can more readily keep track of more detailed food information for you, but in a TTRPG being mindful of only tracking the things that really matters is a virtue. As an aside, board games often can thrive a place in between, as more limited scope and pretty tangible physical artifacts often can justify a bit higher level of detail tracking than what a TTRPG normally supports well.
 
Last edited:

I think a main factor is the quantity and lack of scarcity. In a typical campaign there would be no problem loading up 100 arrows, using only 1 per shot, meaning you need to track 100 events before it even matters. Similar for food, oil, torches etc. The likelihood for actually having the tracking pay off in terms of drama or real choices are really low.

Not only is the chance of a payoff for all this accounting busy work low, but whatever gameplay fun there is to be had from roleplaying not having these mundane supplies can be equally reached by all manner of "you lost your stuff" scenarios. I'm very happy to play out a specific survival scenario where we are robbed, shipwrecked, imprisoned, etc and have to suddenly care about every ration for a little while, and have whatever challenge there is to be had in that. Doing a bunch of accounting through the whole campaign to avoid the same challenge coming up at a random time the GM did not specifically plan any interesting content for is a very different animal.
 

The method of "generation" of this is irrelevant. It could be random, but most often it is the GM or a third party designing it intelligently before players make contact with it.

I think we may agree, if what you’re saying is the method of determining whether you run into trouble when “gambling”, or run out of ammo, should not be DM fiat.

Predetermined encounters or random determination are both OK.

But the DM saying “haha, the archer is out of ammo” or “you decide to cross the Sahara on foot with no canteen, that’s fine” would not be ideal. “Because I said so” is not very fun, right, whether it’s about supplies or something else? Because the dice or the setup said so, agnostic to the player’s future decisions, is better as then the player decisions matter - whether that decision is how many arrows to bring, which spell to prep, or which door to open.

However for there to be the sense of a qualified gamble there need to be some notion of randomness involved, and where the players has some ground to reason around the odds.

Randomness, or just not the GM saying yes or no unrelated to your choices.
 

It depends on the type of game. If the game is about survival in post apocalyptic wasteland where resources in the game world are sparse, tracking stuff is essential part of game play experience. Mundane logistics are part of fun. If the game is mistery solving urban fantasy in modern day setting, where one can just go to local shop and buy most mundane stuff, tracking those things just isn't fun and doesn't add to overall game play.
 

I think we may agree, if what you’re saying is the method of determining whether you run into trouble when “gambling”, or run out of ammo, should not be DM fiat.

Predetermined encounters or random determination are both OK.

But the DM saying “haha, the archer is out of ammo” or “you decide to cross the Sahara on foot with no canteen, that’s fine” would not be ideal. “Because I said so” is not very fun, right, whether it’s about supplies or something else? Because the dice or the setup said so, agnostic to the player’s future decisions, is better as then the player decisions matter - whether that decision is how many arrows to bring, which spell to prep, or which door to open.
The first is bad but I'm genuinely not against the second if it's like 'And there in the east you see a caravan being attacked by bandits, but closer in the west there's a cave' instead of being surrounded on all sides by water. I'm not against having less table player agency if I can have a fun experience/spectacle--emergence to me is novelty not sacred

However, have you read about blorb play haakon? Blorb Principles
 

...Slightly related to the simulationism discussion popping up last months, but as someone that's on the anti-simulationism side I have realized that I'm not against the idea of resource management at all really since I love DS build-up, then spend design or counting how many focus points I have in PF2 but I still find the very idea of having to count how many arrows in my quiver to be repugnantly boring, same with rations and other realistic resources and that got me thinking; why?

Why is there a type of player that are fine or eager to think about abstracted mechanical resources but do not like to have to think about ammunition count?...

What is the difference between spending 1 arrow to attack or losing one suplly of ration for the day compared to, say, a spellslot for a fireball or 3 Focus to teleport after getting hit? My own take is that I think aesthetic has a lot to do with it, having to devote mental energy to keep track of arrows when it doesn't have a splashiness to it feels like a waste. While having to think about your spellslots is an acceptable trade-off for being able to shoot a flamethrower on your hands or your Iaijutsu Delayed Slash; the 'mana' is the limiter on cool not a limiter to function normally.

How do you feel about supply die (e.g. rations or ammunition), quantum equipment/gear, or a pip system (Mausritter)?
 

How do you feel about supply die (e.g. rations or ammunition), quantum equipment/gear, or a pip system (Mausritter)?

There are two problems with mundane/associated resource; How it's done and what it represents. Stuff like encumbrance or resource die or clocks are about the first, I'm gamist through and through so I recognize that all countdown/up are just clocks and that clocks are just HP for a variety of situations/events but I think the problem isn't about the squeeze, it's the juice itself. The very thing it's meant to represent is uninteresting to me.

Are you willing to use an emotion/mental health system where the character can get majorly depressed to the point of being suicidal? In your 'torches-and-10-foot-poles' dungeon crawling game?
Already answered

Though I like quantum equipment/resource points the most yes.
 

Remove ads

Top