Is Resource Management “Fun?”
Oddly, no. In fact, during my AD&D days, when I played a caster, I spent more time worrying about my components than the DM's ever did- I remember asking a party Cleric to bless a piece of leather for me in game once and the DM was very confused.
I'm pretty sure most DM's only care about costly components, as surely, spells that require them must be balanced around the cost (never no mind that balancing spells around gold is a terrible idea, lol)!
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Unless its not about balance, but about what makes symbolic sense for the spell.
I've always wondered about that granularity; I recently made a post along these lines, but I'll be danged if I remember what thread it was in.
Basically, why does the game care about the intrinsic nature of spellcasting so much, when martial combat, which should be the far more common aspect of the game, barely cares what a weapon is, beyond it's damage die?
I mean, think about it, we're told to pay attention to a spellcaster rubbing a piece of wool over a glass rod, or spreading their hands out in a particular gesture to cast Burning Hands, but never about which weapon would be better in a given situation, or even if some weapons would work better for some maneuvers than others (3e being the outlier).
Heck, in 5e, there's barely any point in carrying around multiple weapons! Blasphemy, I say!
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I completely agree. Weapons should matter more. They do somewhat in Level Up, but I'm always looking for more ways to increase granularity in that area.
rmcoen
Adventurer
4e cared about weapon types. The various Martial powers had many instances of "On a hit, inflict [W], but if it's an Axe, also add your CON bonus", or "Make an Attack against one target; if your weapon is a hand crossbow, make an attack against each opponent in the AoE", and so on. It was glorious (IMO).
PF2e has every weapon be somehow unique. I love that too. This weapon does an extra d4 on a crit, that one gets a +2 to hit on your second attack if the first missed, and this other one rerolls 1s (once) for damage.
"No cost" spell components are a complete nostalgia trip from Gygax's original rules. GP-cost items are for balance. (In some cases, the two sets overlap nonsensically.)
As for 5e and weapon types... I add damage type resistances to my monsters. And my armors. And I added Exceptional Hit rules for "greatly exceeded the target number" (great attacks or awful saves) that have a small special effect based on the damage type; slashing weapons inflict bleed 2, bludgeoning has knock down or knockback, fire burns the target for a d4, etc.
I don't remember Martial Powers that worked that way; generally people just took the best weapon for the job. I'm not saying they don't exist, just that weapon choice was mostly "get +3 proficiency or Brutal" with the people I played with.
As a GURPS guy, i do like the way the system rewards different weapons for different kinds of use cases in terms of melee combat, so I definitely feel that. Though, in that system it's the melee combatant who has a lot of system to learn compared to the mage, who just has to learn what their stuff does.
rmcoen
Adventurer
Bell Ringer Bell Ringer Fighter Attack 1 You smash your weapon into your enemy, jarring his vitals. Encounter ✦ Invigorating, Martial, Weapon Standard Action Melee weapon Target: One creature Attack: Strength vs. Fortitude Hit: The target is dazed until the end of your next turn. Weapon: If you’re wielding an axe, a hammer, or a mace, the attack deals damage equal to your Constitution modifier.
Now that you mention it, I do remember that power, though I never chose to use it (I never played the Fighter build that used Invigorating Powers, and honestly, never saw one played).
