Encumbrance in "Stone"

[ruleslawyer]

True encumbrance, like the fact that carrying a 10lb 30' pole is harder than carrying a 10lb dumbbell, is a loosey-goosey concept that can't really be quantified into a number. I think that sort of thing has to be the DM's call.

I think that's why they stopped trying to make everything have an encumbrance value, and just stuck with weight. Weight is a very objective, easy to figure out value that easily translates into a single number, and is easily related to a character's strength.

I don't think encumbrance should come back. If you don't want your players carrying six halberds and four sets of full plate from a battle field - just tell them they can't.

-Nate

I don't really see how a) you can't relate encumbrance to strength (and size!), and b) why encumbrance has to be loosey-goosey within the concept of the game... at least in a bad way. d20 Modern wealth was actually the exact ruleset that I was thinking of when I posted on encumbrance. Make it a Str-based check and stack on penalties depending on how many of x-value items the character already has on him. Removes a lot of bookkeeping.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Given how laughably inflated the 3.* weapon weights are, compared to real world values, I've always assumed that "pounds" was actually being used for a more abstract encumbrance value. So I'd be pretty happy with a generic "EV" value.

Using the generic EV would cause some modest conversion in players' heads, but the really nice thing is that everyone knows up front that the conversion is approximate. Let's see. 1 pound is approx 2.2 kg. So say that every EV is about 5 lbs or 10 kg, and be done with it.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Delta, I like your system and will probably start using it IMC shortly...

I think its interesting that many of the above posters focused in on the use of the 'stone' weight measurement while missing the reasons for chosing it. The attached PDF makes it even easier to convert over and, IMO, is a system usable in the game.

And in explaning it to my players.. one 'Stone' is about the same as 15 pounds.. should cover it nicely. Someone my size would weigh in at about 13 Stones { 195 pounds}

But.. in streamlining I think you missed on piece.. how does the characters STR score help? With this system a STR 10 wearing 4 stones worth of armor has a check penalty of 4. A STR 20 wearing 4 stones worth of armor still has a check penalty of 4... ?

Perhaps a addition that you reduce the check penalty by your STR mod would suffice..
So... in the above our STR 10 guy would still face the -4 penalty, but the Str 20 guy could carry another 2 stone worth of weight before being hindered by encumbrance?

 

[Delta]

Delta, I like your system and will probably start using it IMC shortly...

I think its interesting that many of the above posters focused in on the use of the 'stone' weight measurement while missing the reasons for chosing it. The attached PDF makes it even easier to convert over and, IMO, is a system usable in the game.

And in explaning it to my players.. one 'Stone' is about the same as 15 pounds.. should cover it nicely. Someone my size would weigh in at about 13 Stones { 195 pounds}

Thanks so much for that comment, I appreciate it!

But.. in streamlining I think you missed on piece.. how does the characters STR score help? With this system a STR 10 wearing 4 stones worth of armor has a check penalty of 4. A STR 20 wearing 4 stones worth of armor still has a check penalty of 4... ?

Perhaps a addition that you reduce the check penalty by your STR mod would suffice..
So... in the above our STR 10 guy would still face the -4 penalty, but the Str 20 guy could carry another 2 stone worth of weight before being hindered by encumbrance?

You (and Szatany earlier) are of course correct, on this detail I frankly haven't worked up anything completely simple that I'm totally satisfied with yet. Your idea is probably the simplest, best thing to start with. (One thing I'll point out, again coincidentally, is that if you look at the 3E max carrying capacity increments around the median level of Str 10... they just happen to go up by 15 pounds at a time.)

So I guess that argues for max carrying capacity just being directly equal to your Strength number (with reduced speed at half-Str)? I'm not sure how Str should best effect that skill check number... I have half a mind to just say it doesn't effect it at all (for simplicity), but I'm totally open to anyone's better ideas. Think also about a Str penalty, would that add to the skill check penalty? I'm not sure.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Hadn't considered the movement

Looking over the table and running some numbers.. its hard to get the numbers to work out. WoTC used a increasing graduation on their weight totals.

However, using the following formula works as is for the stats below 21:

Heavy load = Str Score + Str Bonus in stone. Run at X3

Medium load would be half the heavy load and would reduce movement by 10' for every portion of 30' the character has. {in keeping with no tables }. Run at X4

Beyond 21 it gets harder to scale, but given the weights of stuff I don't see any problem with a Str 29 character's heavy load weighing in at only 560 pounds instead of 1,400... especially since this scale is for a Medium creature. 38 Stones would be a medium load for a Large critter with this strength.


Regarding the Str penalty, I don't think its a bad thing to have a penalty to Climb due to a low Str score. In my above, a Str 8 Gent would have a penalty of -5. This would overlap with other armor check penalties. Of course, you could simply use the Str bonus as I did with the heavy load formula above.