Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6533412" data-attributes="member: 22424">First: An outstanding post in general.True, and amusing. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Ah. When I was talking about the TARDIS-backpack, I was meaning a non-magical pack that nonetheless has infinite volume. The reference was to <a href="http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=984" target="_blank">this</a>. Sorry for the poor communication.Lack of experience, mostly, I think.I was thinking on this some more on my drive home. Some thoughts, if you'll permit me a bit of a tangent...Any rule, but especially more peripheral rules (such as encumbrance, but also alignment and spell components) will add a certain amount of hassle to the game, if only because you have to remember to use it. (I'll label that H.) And, likewise, any rule will add some sort of value to the game, which I'll label V.(Both H and V could, in theory, be negative.)So, ideally, you would want to minimise H while maximising V, in order to get the most value for the least hassle. Usually, of course, you get a trade-off between the two.For lots of people, the hassle inherent in encumbrance rules is very high and the value-add very low. So, since H >> V, they'd be better just abandoning the rules entirely - they just don't work for them.Conversely, you've indicated that not using encumbrance can weaken or even damage immersion. In which case, V >> H, and it makes sense to use encumbrance almost regardless. (Though, with 500 pages of house rules, I expect you're using a pretty damn good variant. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )And, for me, I like the concept of encumbrance, but find that the ratio of Hassle to Value-add is just wrong - too much hassle, and not enough gain. And so I find myself noodling about for a better way, one that's either less Hassle (such as using simplified units as Dausuul suggest), or gives more Value-add, or both.But, of course, that's all a tangent. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification