D&D General Huge Equipment Lists: Good, Bad, or Ugly?

[Cergorach]

That's why we have portable holes with a ladder and built in shelves.

It's either that or the DM forks over a Bag of Holding, as they quickly get tired of me going: "I don't trust the neighborhood here to park my mule! Let's go somewhere else..." or "The parking is insufficient at that dungeon for my horse and wagon, let's move on..."

 

[Oofta]

Totally understandable!

Obviously in any well-designed game incorporating a realistic penalty for sleeping in armor, you'd have to make the armor more relatively protective and valuable than D&D does, in trying to serve the unarmored swashbuckler fantasy. The game would need better tradeoffs and balance between those options. Or it just wouldn't support the unarmored swashbuckler fantasy the same way.

Based on both personal experience (I don't need to be comfortable to get adequate sleep) and game balance, I disagree with penalizing people for wearing heavy armor. A main issue is that high quality plate armor should have a far higher AC in comparison to that swashbuckler than what we have. In that case things like penalties for sleeping in armor would be counter balanced.

When a penalty only applies to at most to 25% of the group I don't think it's a good penalty to apply. Unless of course there's other similar things that apply to the other 75% of the group.

 

[Mannahnin]

A main issue is that high quality plate armor should have a far higher AC in comparison to that swashbuckler than what we have. In that case things like penalties for sleeping in armor would be counter balanced.

Yes, this is the sort of thing I was alluding to. If armor is sufficiently protective that it's worth the downsides of cost, how long it takes to get suited up, etc., then it becomes a more interesting choice.

When a penalty only applies to at most to 25% of the group I don't think it's a good penalty to apply. Unless of course there's other similar things that apply to the other 75% of the group.

If it's something they willingly take on because it's a worthwhile tradeoff, then percentage of the party shouldn't matter.

Usually the number of Wizards in a group is below 25%, and no one else has the restriction of having a spellbook which can be destroyed or lost, but we don't mind that only they suffer that issue, because it's part of the concept and the player willingly takes on that limitation.

Based on both personal experience (I don't need to be comfortable to get adequate sleep)

You do a lot of heavy exertion and fighting after your "adequate" sleep, do you? I can tell you that I don't lift as much, run as fast, jump as far, or endure anything strenuous for as long after a poor night's sleep.

 

[Oofta]

Yes, this is the sort of thing I was alluding to. If armor is sufficiently protective that it's worth the downsides of cost, how long it takes to get suited up, etc., then it becomes a more interesting choice.


If it's something they willingly take on because it's a worthwhile tradeoff, then percentage of the party shouldn't matter.

Usually the number of Wizards in a group is below 25%, and no one else has the restriction of having a spellbook which can be destroyed or lost, but we don't mind that only they suffer that issue, because it's part of the concept and the player willingly takes on that limitation.

I don't remember any campaign ever where a wizard's spell book was destroyed though. I don't see people stating that those books should be casually destroyed because it's "challenging".

If it was though, the player has the option of creating copy spellbooks. It may be expensive, but then again they don't have to spend a 1.5k gold on armor.

You do a lot of heavy exertion and fighting after your "adequate" sleep, do you? I can tell you that I don't lift as much, run as fast, jump as far, or endure anything strenuous for as long after a poor night's sleep.

I find that strenuous exercise makes me sleep like a log unless I'm cold and wet. extremely hot, or there's significant noise and disruption. Like if you've been backpacking in Peru and you're in a hotel with opening in the ceiling for ventilation and there's a party that cranks the sound up to 11 (and has the same beat) all ... night ... long.

Otherwise I sleep just fine even when it's not comfy, you get used to it. Especially if you've been doing strenuous activity. I think people tend to underestimate the situations we can get adequate sleep.

 

[Mannahnin]

I don't remember any campaign ever where a wizard's spell book was destroyed though. I don't see people stating that those books should be casually destroyed because it's "challenging".

If it was though, the player has the option of creating copy spellbooks. It may be expensive, but then again they don't have to spend a 1.5k gold on armor.

I'm a little confused. Are you saying this restriction or limitation on less than 25% of PCs doesn't count because you think no one ever actually imposes it?

I find that strenuous exercise makes me sleep like a log unless I'm cold and wet. extremely hot, or there's significant noise and disruption. Like if you've been backpacking in Peru and you're in a hotel with opening in the ceiling for ventilation and there's a party that cranks the sound up to 11 (and has the same beat) all ... night ... long.

Otherwise I sleep just fine even when it's not comfy, you get used to it. Especially if you've been doing strenuous activity. I think people tend to underestimate the situations we can get adequate sleep.

You've got my point backwards though.

As I've affirmed about five times so far, yes, of course people can sleep in less comfortable situations when they're physically exhausted.

The point I was making is that after a worse night's sleep, you're less able to perform physically strenuous tasks (or mental, for that matter). Performance measurably and observably suffers. This contributes to home field advantage in sports, among other things.

 

[Oofta]

I'm a little confused. Are you saying this restriction or limitation on less than 25% of PCs doesn't count because you think no one ever actually imposes it?

I've never seen it imposed, there are clear workarounds if it were, people never actively state that it would be a good challenge for the group.

You've got my point backwards though.

As I've affirmed about five times so far, yes, of course people can sleep in less comfortable situations when they're physically exhausted.

The point I was making is that after a worse night's sleep, you're less able to perform physically strenuous tasks (or mental, for that matter). Performance measurably and observably suffers. This contributes to home field advantage in sports, among other things.

In my experience it was not enough to dramatically affect my capabilities. If people were dramatically affected by uncomfortable sleeping situations (and stacking levels of exhaustion, the most common penalty, kill you pretty quickly) humanity would not have survived.

 

[Mannahnin]

To my recollection everyone quoted (including myself) has said you can do it in a pinch, if you're tired enough, but it's not comfortable. Your sleep quality DOES suffer and that will impair your performance the following day if you need to engage in heavy exertion.

If this were a more realistic simulation and we cared about detailed fatigue, we might do something like impose a simple -1 to D20 rolls and save DCs per night you sleep in discomfort like this. Not a crippling penalty for a night or two, but the weariness and aches will add up over time.

 

[James Gasik]

Let's put it this way. In ideal circumstances, you wouldn't wear heavy armor to bed. You probably would want to wear it at little as possible, because it's not just heavy, it's hot, and fighting in it can drain your stamina in a very short amount of time. Fortunately, D&D characters are not typically forced to make checks to avoid exhaustion for the simple chore of combat- it would be a very different game if they were!

In battlefield conditions, a character may feel it's necessary to try and sleep in their armor. Humans can sleep in extreme conditions, but if you don't get good sleep, there are outstanding health issues that again, the rules don't really come out and enforce.

Part of this is the rules for sleep and exhaustion are already completely gamist- the record for a human going without sleep is something like 11 days, a D&D character would be dead inside a week, lol.

At the end of the day, a DM could penalize a character for wearing their heavy armor at night, thus making a surprise night battle truly terrifying- assuming the party doesn't have a Wizard who casts Alarm and Tiny Hut every long rest, rendering the whole question rather moot.

If you don't want your characters to wear heavy armor, penalizing them for doing so will quickly reinforce your desires. If you want them to wear heavy armor, not penalizing them for doing so will have a similar effect.

The question isn't "what is realistic?" but "what do I want to happen in my games?".

Ditto the Wizard's spellbook. If you want people to play Wizards, invoking the loss of their spellbook is a good way to discourage that reality. If players find a penalty too annoying to deal with, they will simply avoid it. You could play a Dex Fighter or a Barbarian instead. Or play any other spellcasting class besides a Wizard. If Paladins are at risk of losing their powers, be a Cleric.

Etc., etc..

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

I'm inclined to favor long lists of available stuff. But as many others have noted the stuff has to be useful. Also, there is a level-of-abstraction issue: Too little distraction drowns the Fun, as the players and GM have to fiddle with all fiddly bits of (e.g.) socks, scarves, sweaters, etc. instead of just obtaining a "set of good warm clothing." But too much abstraction can starve the Fun, because a little fiddling with bits and pieces - and the customization possibilities this provides - can be cool.

One way to handle this is to have standard options and then "customize your pizza" options. But the custom-pizza has to be fluff-only, or else the PC will have incentives to load up ("I'll order TWO pizzas!") in order to get the conditional bonuses/avoid the conditional penalties that custom-options put on offer. Unless a clever way can be found to properly price the two-pizza kit - with "it costs more" and "it weighs more" not working well as increased prices in typical groups.

Maybe have more stuff cost more time to use - time needed to break the extras out & to put them away again. Or have extras that reward skill, somehow, so that a big fancy custom-chosen set of (e.g.) lockpicking tools will not ever help a standard rogue, but will sometimes give a circumstance bonus to a rogue built with a lock-picking specialization.

In some ways it's the mundane analog of material components requirements for spells. Some find great Fun in enforcing the iron-filings and bits-of-wool requirements for casting spells, while many others just want to abstract the whole thing away with "component pouches" or even just drop those rules entirely.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Beautiful if the equipment actually has mechanical value.

Yeah, I don't really care if the equipment list is large, I care if the stuff actually does something beyond fluff.