Darkvision Ruins Dungeon-Crawling

[Thomas Shey]

Oh yeah, this is entirely a discussion of opinions.

Its not just opinion, but taste, and thus even one step farther down.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I suppose that touches on the thing I said about needing some experience to know when to focus on tracking vision and light sources so it's own kind of fun challenge for the players, rather than a chore with no particular stakes involved. Like if you go 'Oh by the way it's been an hour in-game, so your torch just burnt out and you can't see' - 'Oh ok, I just light another one', that's just busywork. It takes some discernment in running games to know when it would be the most interesting time for the torch to burn out, and when to gloss over it, and when to track it properly so the players don't think you're just arbitrarily dicking them over when it would be 'interesting' to do so.

While I accept there can be some differences here, I'll also suggest that for some people that will never add enough fun to justify the overhead. It just won't.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I suppose that touches on the thing I said about needing some experience to know when to focus on tracking vision and light sources so it's own kind of fun challenge for the players, rather than a chore with no particular stakes involved. Like if you go 'Oh by the way it's been an hour in-game, so your torch just burnt out and you can't see' - 'Oh ok, I just light another one', that's just busywork. It takes some discernment in running games to know when it would be the most interesting time for the torch to burn out, and when to gloss over it, and when to track it properly so the players don't think you're just arbitrarily dicking them over when it would be 'interesting' to do so.

Agreed with that.

I think it makes sense, though, that a creature that lives in the dark is going to attack light sources. It's not being a jerk to have them do that.

But it is also an incentive (for me) to create attack tables in Shadowdark, like those in Dragonbane. Where attacking light sources is one of the things monsters might choose to do.

 

[Distracted DM]

Its not just opinion, but taste, and thus even one step farther down.

I don't get your meaning, can you elaborate?

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't get your meaning, can you elaborate?

Its me being nitpicky. Your statement is technically correct, but it doesn't distinguish that in this case its an opinion based in taste rather than presumed but undemonstrated (and probably undemonstratable) fact, and thus irrefutable: from where you sit the value you're defending is absolutely correct, but its only going to be true with people who share similar tastes.

To try and make it clear, its the difference between "This is a good idea" and "this is a good idea if you want X". The former has a much higher order of argument that needs to be made for it (or at least requires considerable more unpacking than the latter, where it can be effective a tautology).

 

[loverdrive]

I suppose that touches on the thing I said about needing some experience to know when to focus on tracking vision and light sources so it's own kind of fun challenge for the players, rather than a chore with no particular stakes involved. Like if you go 'Oh by the way it's been an hour in-game, so your torch just burnt out and you can't see' - 'Oh ok, I just light another one', that's just busywork. It takes some discernment in running games to know when it would be the most interesting time for the torch to burn out, and when to gloss over it, and when to track it properly so the players don't think you're just arbitrarily dicking them over when it would be 'interesting' to do so.

Related, but I think I've spoke before about the concept of "pointless resources that don't do anything". They are unfortunately common in game design! Light sources are often that. Encumbrance is almost always that. In video games, weapon durability, thirst, hunger, etc — all are things that are sooo easy to manage every time you have to manage them you only groan. Fine, whatever, I will throw some junk out, gimme a sec.

On an order even higher there is a weird thing with mechanics that you "expect" to have being made as toothless as possible. In videogames you can observe how reloading animations get faster and faster, while magazines get bigger and bigger with each passing year, because sometimes it's easier to just make a mechanic have minimal impact than to just remove it wholesale.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Related, but I think I've spoke before about the concept of "pointless resources that don't do anything". They are unfortunately common in game design! Light sources are often that. Encumbrance is almost always that. In video games, weapon durability, thirst, hunger, etc — all are things that are sooo easy to manage every time you have to manage them you only groan. Fine, whatever, I will throw some junk out, gimme a sec.

On an order even higher there is a weird thing with mechanics that you "expect" to have being made as toothless as possible. In videogames you can observe how reloading animations get faster and faster, while magazines get bigger and bigger with each passing year, because sometimes it's easier to just make a mechanic have minimal impact than to just remove it wholesale.

IMO, Encumbrance works best when:

• It's based on number of items, not weight (possibly with some items taking up multiple slots, and some zero)
• The number of slots is pretty small.

At that point it's not a lot of bookkeeping, and it forces some interesting decisions about what to carry. And that's when tracking light sources can also become interesting, and not just burdensome, as long as the other rules around light and vision are well designed.

 

[loverdrive]

IMO, Encumbrance works best when:

• It's based on number of items, not weight (possibly with some items taking up multiple slots, and some zero)
• The number of slots is pretty small.

At that point it's not a lot of bookkeeping, and it forces some interesting decisions about what to carry. And that's when tracking light sources can also become interesting, and not just burdensome, as long as the other rules around light and vision are well designed.

I think the second one is way more important the first.

People shrug off encumbrance even when playing on VTTs that automate the bookkeeping, and don't mind tracking HP and spellslots and superiority dice and blood points and willpower and whatever when playing without any tools.

Generally, I think encumbrance is one of those cases where the mechanic is there only as a lip service, because without it people will complain that it's unrealistic to carry five swords, and with it being impactful people will complain that they can't carry five swords.

 

[GrimCo]

One thing that always rubbed me wrong way is prevalent use of torches. Oil lamps were thing way back in the ancient Greece and Rome. Romans and Byzantines even made metal oil lamps. Sure, you need to carry it, but it still beats torches. And let's be honest, tech in most fantasy settings is way ahead.

 

[Reynard]

I think the second one is way more important the first.

People shrug off encumbrance even when playing on VTTs that automate the bookkeeping, and don't mind tracking HP and spellslots and superiority dice and blood points and willpower and whatever when playing without any tools.

Generally, I think encumbrance is one of those cases where the mechanic is there only as a lip service, because without it people will complain that it's unrealistic to carry five swords, and with it being impactful people will complain that they can't carry five swords.

Encumbrance is about choices. If employed correctly, players have to weigh options of things that might be useful or even life saving, versus being able to move faster or more quietly, as well as how much treasure they can make it out with. In the context of the classic dungeon crawl, encumbrance is just as important as light.