Poll: Realism Modules in Your Game

[Maxperson]

I'd love to know how many people back in the "hardcore" days of OD&D/BECMI/1e were tracking this, or just wrote, "2 wks. iron rations, 20 arrows" and never changed that.

We tracked it. There were lots of times that I ran out of both.

 

[Maxperson]

Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire twenty arrows or only nineteen?"

I thought you were going to follow that with, "You've got to ask your self one question. Do I feel lucky?"

Edit: I really need to read further before responding

 

[Jd Smith1]

I use nearly all of those, and more. Plus death is never reversible, no matter what the system.

I find it encourages more party unity and thought. But I have also found it isn't for everyone.

 

[John R Davis]

Clearly varies by games BUT one thing that puts me off a game almost straight away is an active defence roll. Bleh

 

[Nakander]

I find the best sessions are those in which no one is trying to rush the details.

So to answer your question, I think there's merit in all of these and I've used them all.

 

[Haiku Elvis]

I've always liked the bits in fantasy novels where the charaters are dealing with weather and food and avoiding detection or staying ahead of their pursuers in the wilderness as much as big fighty set pieces (shout out to the whole later part of the Wierdstone of Brisingamen)
So I like the bits like weather/fatigue/hunger etc that make these things an alternative challenge for the players to just the usual fight the baddie.
But like many have already said I leave it when unnecessary/resources are plentiful etc.

 

[GMMichael]

Ammunition accounting is a good example of depends-on-the-system. On the one hand, someone with arrows has a huge advantage on those who don't: you can attack/reach while your opponents cannot. So yeah, count those arrows down because the opponents are keenly interested in when they'll run out. On the other, bows can be relatively slow when it comes to hurting your opponent, compared to stabby-weapons. Your game might limit the speed/frequency of your bow attacks instead of your ammo. On your third hand , a game might use both rules - ammo accounting and slow fire rate - and let's hope those bows do a ton of damage. If not, the game probably won't see a lot of archers.

Full disclosure: I've been closing on several archers lately in Enderal, and it gets painful without a large shield for protection!

There was a time i'd check a lot of these. These days I just want to get to the action and what I find fun and worthwhile. The mini game of traveling through inhospitable places, managing inventory, realistic healing, etc.. is just not worth the time and effort. YMMV.

Dang it: realistic healing! I knew I'd forget something. Although it's more of a lack-of-module than an additional module. Since realistic healing is super slow, just omitting rules about healing is pretty realistic.

I use nearly all of those, and more. Plus death is never reversible, no matter what the system.

So to answer your question, I think there's merit in all of these and I've used them all.

What additional realism mods do you use? Which ones pushed the limits of cost/benefit?

 

[Jd Smith1]

What additional realism mods do you use? Which ones pushed the limits of cost/benefit?

Well, I mostly use Zweihander now, which is a detail-oriented system, very lethal, with a slow-recovery healing system, so I don't have many house rules anymore. But one I've used for decades regardless of system is that you can only use a short edged weapon or a handgun when in body-to-body combat. That one really hits D&D players where they live.

 

[aramis erak]

But one I've used for decades regardless of system is that you can only use a short edged weapon or a handgun when in body-to-body combat. That one really hits D&D players where they live.

It's really not all that realistic. Rifles? yeah, pretty hard to use. Swords? I can still saw you, club you with the hilt, beat you about the back and thighs, when in body-to-body range/grappled. It's no longer common in the SCA, but it's quite doable with 1h swords or 1h mass weapons to get good strong hits while in clutch or locked shields. (Especially since it's now disallowed in most SCA kingdoms to grapple, clutch, or shield-lock.)
The worst bruise I've gotten from melee combat with SCA heavy (Rattan weapon simulators) was a rush into a two-hander, who levered it around me and literally lifted me into him... then repeated the hit while we toppled to the ground.Ran from mid buttock to mid calf.
I'd suggest as well taking a look at the Talhoffer manuscript, Fechtbuch von 1467. It's gruesomely enlightening about how close combat works; reenactors working from it have shown the melee sections to be quite viable as depicted.

 

[Yora]

Carrying capacity, food rations, and ammunition supplies are not really modular aspects, but integral parts of a greater system that also includes wandering monsters.
Any supplies carried into the wilderness and dungeons slows the party down, which leads to a longer adventure, and as such increases the number of encounters. If wandering monster encounters pose real threats, provide little reward, and consume more supplies than the party can gain from them, then managing their equipment becomes a balancing act that is constantly going on the entire time the players are playing the adventure.
Once common consensus said that random encounters are stupid and GMs first decided to only have one encounter per journey (to get on with the prcious story), and eventually no travel encounters at all, the time pressure disappeared, making encumbrance, rations, and ammunition all irrelevant in the process.