Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8145189" data-attributes="member: 6785785">This may be true, for sure, but even when it is, the rules create some kind of starting point. If they are clearly delineated, then there's a framework in place to understand and to engage with.For instance, my group has long dismissed any kind of encumbrance or carrying capacity rules in D&D. We just find them boring bookkeeping.....so we jettisoned them entirely. What we've put in place can't even be quantified, really, beyond being an appeal to common sense.Now, getting rid of encumbrance/carrying capacity impacts the game in that the tactical element of having some kind of inventory limit causing decisions of how to best fill it is pretty much gone, or at the very least severely impacted. Is that sufficient reason to not get rid of the rule? Which headache is bigger; all that resource and inventory tracking, or the occasional instance where someone has more stuff than they reasonably should? It's up to the group to decide.Maybe it gets addressed through the rules: "Hey, you found a bag of holding!" Or maybe it needs a discussion outside of the arena of rules.And as you say, there's more than just the rules to it.....but they are the framework by which we engage the game. This is why I tend to be advocating for the use of rules and/or set procedures in this thread. It makes things more understandable. It establishes how things are "supposed" to go. Doesn't mean they must go that way.....just that this is the default expectation, unless. So....encumbrance. We ditched it because we didn't like it. We replaced it with something that is so vague that it not only would be prone to conflict, but it would almost actively promote it. Luckily, inventory was never that big a part of our game that this mattered all that much. Honestly, this kind of worked out okay by total serendipity. We didn't realize the potential impact changing a rule could have, we just did it because no one liked looking up and counting the weight of their items.But if we were to take a rule in some other area and remove a clearly defined method with a vague one....wow, the impact could have been huge, and likely would have caused all kinds of issues.(I realize a lot of the above goes well beyond a response to what you posted, but it all seemed connected to the ongoing discussion)Oh, sure....there will always be instances that go beyond being able to address things reasonably. Always will be exceptions.No, I think I understand your point. I'm not saying the rules don't matter because obviously opinions on the rules will vary, and if opinions at the same table conflict, then you may have a problem of some sort. I think that very often the solution to this problem is beyond the rules in that a discussion needs to happen, and then a reasonable solution can be worked out.If such a discussion isn't possible, then I think how to proceed is a bit tricky, but would need input specific to the situation and the actual participants.</blockquote>

Verification