Do you keep track of normal ammunition?

[korjik]

As a DM I dont worry about it because:

As a player, I bought a bunch of arrows (300 IIRC) stuck most of them in a bag of holding, and didnt run out in 6 levels. Game ran out before the arrows did. I did occasionally have to take a couple actions to get arrows out of the BoH when my ready supply ran out, but that was maybe twice.

 

[Janx]

I'm playing in a Star Wars Saga Edition game, where "normal ammo" is an energy cell good for a large number of shots (50 or 100, or nearly indefinite use if in a lightsaber). So, for most intents and purposes, nobody worries about ammo use...

But, that opens up an interesting item - a Force power that drains energy cells! Dramatically appropriate is facing off with the big bad Sith lord, who draws his lightsaber, and tries to ignite it, and it fails! Woot!

The D&D equivalent is a druid with Warp Wood against an archer, I suppose....

And this is a good point (and idea). In the Call of Duty Modern Warfare series, I find that I never run out of ammo before I die. You get like 200, 250 rounds or so. This is plenty for an extended combat where you will eventually get killed and respawn.

 

[saskganesh]

Of course I do.

They haven't run out yet, ever, but they think they might.

It's a little detail that with my group adds a little more.

 

[S'mon]

No, not unless it all gets used up in one fight. I think it's a ridiculous idea that slingstones, arrows and quarrels are destroyed on use. It's neither realistic nor fun.

 

[Argyle King]

I prefer to keep track. Sometimes it depends on system and setting, but my preference is to keep track. Allowing what is essentially infinite ammo for the team of PCs using the Browning M2 .50 cal machine gun is somewhat game breaking.

 

[Desdichado]

One kind of fun in D&D is resource management. Counting your arrows is a pretty simple form of that, and not unreasonable, considering what the spell casters have to do.

I already don't play spellcasters because I think that the resource management associated with them isn't fun. And we completely ignore material components.

Resource management is great if that's what you like. I personally hate it with a passion in a game that's supposed to be about over-the-top action movie type action. I get enough of the game of Balance Sheet Management at work already. I hardly want it intruding into my hobbies.

Additionally, considering a quiver carries about 20 arrows and it's pretty ridiculous to be carrying multiple quivers on your person, running out of ammo on your person SHOULD be a factor in the PCs tactics.

And that, also, assumes that you find tactics fun. I don't. Not D&D tactics, anyway.

Arrows should be managed as a scarce resource because of the added value they give to combat by way of extending reach. A longsword has a reach of 5' and does 1d8. An arrow has much farther reach and is balanced by being a consumable resource that occupies inventory and thus is not infinite in how long the PC gets the benefit.

Change "should" to "could (if you like that sort of thing)" and I'll agree with you.

 

[Lwaxy]

Only when relevant, as in wherever resources may become scarce.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Just wondering,

Do you, either as players or DMs, keep track of the PCs normal ammunition for bows or crossbows?

My tactic has in the past just to ignore the issue, and assume PCs stock up on necessary ammo and if necessary recover arrows/bolts from fallen dead or what not. Bottom line, it often seemed like an unnecessary complication.

Just wondering if any others take ammo more seriously?

I track normal ammo on both sides of the DM's screen.

 

[delericho]

No, but...

IMO, tracking ammunition is a lot like tracking encumbrance - it's only fun if it leads to interesting choices. (Do the party carry lots of arrows, or do they carry more food/torches/rope instead? Is there a real risk of running out?) The problem is that the D&D rules as written, in pretty much every edition, just allow characters to carry far too much. So, if the DM requires players to track ammo, the players respond by buying hundreds of arrows and having the Fighter carry them all. At which point, tracking them just becomes a tedious pain without any payoff.

The solution I'm working on will handle carrying capacity not by the PC's strength, but rather their ability to actually pack these things. (It's a bit more involved than, "you can carry 10 things", but you get the idea...)

Another part of this scheme will be that characters won't have to track individual arrows. Instead, they'll carry a number of "bunches". If a character uses up any ammo during an encounter, then they have to cross off a bunch of arrows at the end of the encounter - whether they fired one arrow or 100. And if they use multiple types of ammo, they have to cross of a bunch of each. (Of course, PCs won't then be able to lend "an arrow" to another PC - they'll have to lend a bunch of them. I'm planning on dropping in a "rule of one" to cover the corner cases.)

 

[Kemper Boyd]

I think most of the time keeping track of ordinary consumables like bullets, food and such isn't really worth the hassle. However, there's games and scenarios where it might even be more fun, like when playing something like survival horror or playing soldiers operating behind enemy lines without support.

The main thing of course is to tell the people playing if you will be keeping track of stuff like that, like a fair GM would do.