Encumberance... In or Out?
- Thread starter Scribble
- Start date
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Although i hate tracking encumbrance, i think it should be in in some kind of way...
the most important thing is that it is an easy to remember malus - maybe weakening you if you wear a too heavy load - so that you don´t have to look it up constantly
the most important thing is that it is an easy to remember malus - maybe weakening you if you wear a too heavy load - so that you don´t have to look it up constantly
Nahat Anoj
First Post
I'm pretty sure it's in, in the form of lbs.Scribble said:
I don't mind having some kind of encumbrance system, but I *hate* bean counting. I much prefer slots from Diablo 2.
davethegame
Explorer
Jonathan Moyer said:
Agreed. I tend to ignore encumbrance rules anyway, but I know that's not the solution for everyone. I hope the rules are a happy middle.
Keeping track of every damn ounce is annoying but I don't mind hitting up the big items like armor, weapons, 50 lbs solid gold statues, etc. Then just throw a rough and reasonable amount onto the total for incidentals.
That at least keeps the PCs from picking up every damn sword, helmet, whatever they come across cause it might be worth a couple of coppers to somebody. (I blame Diablo for that
)
That at least keeps the PCs from picking up every damn sword, helmet, whatever they come across cause it might be worth a couple of coppers to somebody. (I blame Diablo for that
)I assume that it is in, but I think that it will come into play even less than it did in 3e... and that's saying something.
In 3e, players were encouraged to hold a ton of items as they needed every equipment slot filled to gain advantage over the monsters. For every moderately leveled adventuring NPC that you killed, they usually had all/most of their slots filled which creates lots of loot/weight to lug around. (Albeit that Bags of Holding kind of negates the need to track much of the weight.)
In 4e, as we know, there are many fewer equipment slots which, by my logic above, should mean less treasure being awarded and creating less weight to cart around.
In 3e, players were encouraged to hold a ton of items as they needed every equipment slot filled to gain advantage over the monsters. For every moderately leveled adventuring NPC that you killed, they usually had all/most of their slots filled which creates lots of loot/weight to lug around. (Albeit that Bags of Holding kind of negates the need to track much of the weight.)
In 4e, as we know, there are many fewer equipment slots which, by my logic above, should mean less treasure being awarded and creating less weight to cart around.
cangrejoide
First Post
Encumbrance is lame. I say just GM fiat it.
In direct contrast what I just posted above, WOTC may have decided that encumbrance was "not fun" which means that they definitely removed it.Blackbrrd said:(From a 3e game) We started out using encumbrance at level 1. We are currently at level 14 and haven't recalculated encumbrance since level 1. And we never will.
