RPG Evolution: Weight, What?

"Every ounce counts."
1.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

This mantra echoes through the mind of any experienced backpacker, a constant negotiation between necessity and comfort, safety and speed. Extended wilderness trips demand meticulous packing, where every item is weighed, scrutinized, and often grudgingly left behind. Philmont Scout Ranch taught me some strict guidelines: carry no more than 30% of your body weight. This isn't just a suggestion; it's a foundation for endurance and injury prevention. Yet, when factoring in essential consumables like food and water, this is no easy task. Here's what I learned the hard way.

The Relentless Math of the Pack​

Achieving that ideal 30% body weight target is a constant battle against gravity and temptation. As I experienced on the hike, even with fierce discipline, sacrifices are inevitable. Getting my base pack weight down to 35 lbs. often meant leaving behind creature comforts. A lightweight, foldable chair might seem like a luxury, but after miles on the trail, the promise of a comfortable seat can become a powerful motivator (I gave up mine in favor of an inflatable pad, no regrets there). Rain pants, initially deemed optional to save ounces, were sorely missed when a sudden downpour hit, leading to the beginnings of hypothermia (a LOT of regret about that one!). Every item, from an extra pair of socks to a favorite snack, adds to the total, forcing hikers to prioritize ruthlessly. It's a stark lesson in minimalism, where every personal item must justify its existence in ounces, not just in utility.

The Consumable Conundrum​

Even after stripping down to the bare essentials, the true weight challenge emerges with food and water. Water weighs approximately 2 lb. per liter; Philmont recommended 5 liters minimum per person (10 lbs). For a ten-person crew, even with careful rationing and planning for resupply, the initial water weight is substantial. Add to that the necessary caloric intake—around 3,000 calories per day per person for high-intensity activity (approximately 5 more lbs), which for a group of ten, translated to a considerable mass of food and cooking gear that must be carried. For my Philmont trek, these essentials pushed my pack weight past a daunting 50 lbs.

The good news is that this load doesn't remain static. As food is eaten and water is consumed, the pack naturally lightens, providing a small, much-anticipated psychological boost each day. The bad news is that this reduction is temporary. Strategic resupply at streams and camps is crucial, meaning the pack weight constantly fluctuates. We'd start the day off lighter, only to refill water at a river crossing and find the weight inceased, necessitating careful planning for where and when to carry maximum load.

Carrying the Burden​

The real-world struggle of managing pack weight finds a direct parallel in D&D's encumbrance and overland travel rules. Characters in D&D aren't immune to the laws of physics, and their carrying capacity can, depending on the campaign, affect adventurers quite a bit.

In D&D 5th (2024) a creature's normal carrying capacity is its Strength score multiplied by 15 pounds. For instance, a character with a Strength of 10 can comfortably carry up to 150 lbs, while a burly Strength 16 character can manage 240 lbs. However, many Dungeon Masters opt to use the Variant Encumbrance rules from the 2014 version, which add granular penalties for progressively heavier loads. Under these optional rules, a 50 lb. pack can quickly become a significant hindrance, even if it's below the absolute maximum carrying capacity.
  • If a character carries weight in excess of 5 times their Strength score, they become encumbered, reducing their speed by 10 feet. For example, a character with a Strength of 8 would become encumbered at 40 lbs, meaning a 50 lb. pack would immediately reduce their movement. Even a Strength 10 character carrying 50 lbs would find their speed reduced by 10 feet.
  • Should they carry weight exceeding 10 times their Strength score, they become heavily encumbered, suffering a 20-foot speed reduction and Disadvantage on D20 Tests involving Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution. While a 50 lb. pack wouldn't typically make a character heavily encumbered unless their Strength score was very low (e.g., 5 Strength makes 50 lbs heavily encumbered), the first tier of encumbrance is a common reality.
Overland travel further complicates this. Traveling at a normal pace covers 24 miles per day for 8 hours of marching, but this assumes relatively unencumbered movement. If a character is encumbered or heavily encumbered, their reduced speed translates directly to covering less ground each day, burning more resources (food, water, torches), and increasing exposure to random encounters.

We hiked 30 miles over 5 days at Philmont (not counting the first day at basecamp where we sleep over, and the fact that we spent half-days hiking on the second and last day), meaning our average daily travel was 6 miles per day. This was despite significant elevation changes (7,908' to 8,246') and the heavy 50 lb. packs. With 8 hours of travel, we were traveling at a Normal pace (4 miles per hour) of 24 miles per day, further complicated by:
  • Difficult Terrain: D&D rules state that moving 1 foot in difficult terrain costs 2 feet of speed. While Philmont wasn't all difficult terrain, significant elevation changes, rocky trails, and even muddy patches due to storms certainly qualified. It effectively halved our speed for those segments, drastically reducing daily progress. The 24 miles per day became 12 miles per day.
  • Elevation: We were at nearly 10,000 feet above sea level and I suffered from altitude sickness for two days: each hour such a creature spends traveling at high altitude counts as 2 hours for the purpose of determining how long that creature can travel. The 12 miles per day became 6 miles per day.
These factors do not include exhaustion rules, which (surprisingly) do not affect overland travel in D&D but certainly could. A DM could reasonably impose levels of exhaustion for characters pushing themselves with heavy loads over multiple days without adequate rest. It's worth noting that not all of my crew suffered from altitude sickness, just me, but the crew only moves as fast as its slowest member (my to my group's consternation as I kept taking breaks and asking for them to slow down their pace).

Add all this up, and our real-world pace of 6 miles per day matched the severe reductions caused by the effects of high altitude, heavy encumbrance, and difficult terrain. A DM aiming for realism might apply these layered penalties to make the journey an accurate, grueling test of endurance, just as we experienced.

The Weight of Adventure​

DMs have a powerful tool in encumbrance, not just for realism, but for narrative impact. Characters aren't just carrying their armor and weapons; they're hauling treasure from a goblin horde, vital rations for a besieged town, or the cumbersome magical artifact needed to save the world. The difference between a well-managed load and an overloaded party can define the pace, difficulty, and ultimately, the success of a quest.

Ultimately, the burden of carried weight can transform an adventure from a simple journey into a tactical challenge. A well-prepared party, making smart choices about what to carry and when to resupply, finds the adventure an exciting test of endurance. A heedless party, weighed down by unnecessary bulk, faces an excruciating slog, constantly fighting against the very gear meant to aid them, turning every step into a monumental effort. Using these rules fosters a healthy respect for logistics, making every ounce, every pound, truly matter. It certainly did for our hike.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca


log in or register to remove this ad

Is it that they actively prefer fantastical heroism, or that they actively don't want to bother keeping track of this stuff? In other words, is the preference rooted in avoidance?


In my experience, players don't even like taking off armor to sleep or in social situations. They feel like it's the DM nerfing them.
Yup. Anything that might effect showing off the super powers IME. Fortunately my current group feels differently.
 


I love tracking weight and supplies, because I love that D&D started as a wargame, and I remember the quote: “amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics”.

My favorite book about war … “The Things They Carried”.

My favorite veteran co-worker … logistics officer; he had done infantry and artillery, but logistics was his true calling and where he ended up.

My favorite part of “RECON”, the RPG of the Vietnam War? The GM advice that if it’s not on the character sheet, they left it behind. Specifically, if nobody has a P-76 can opener, and they have canned rations, they need to get creative.

So, yes, I count arrows and rations.

And I think a Bag of Holding, Portable Hole, the Create Food & Water spell, and the Sending spell (D&D radio) are key technologies.
I'm down with that, so long as they're tools to help and not fig leaves to ignore the issue.
 

I just boosted non finesse/non ranged weapons by a die bump or two.

IE:
longsword is d10(V d12), with this even the hated Flex mastery has it's merit. It's then d12+str damage vs. d8+dex and Vex mastery.
greatsword/axe/maul is at 2d8
for dual wield there is d8 Light weapon, vs d6 Light/finesse weapon.
maybe add Heavy 1Handed weapon with d12 damage(V 2d6) that can have Graze mastery instead of UA's Flex.
then again you get d12+STR damage(STR damage on a miss) vs d8+dex with Vex and both viable options.

also adding min STR to every armor helps with people not dumping STR.
I once had a party where it turned out the entire party dumped strength. Did not know what to do or how to justify it in my head. The party immediately became nonsensical to me.
 


Ever since I heard the whole Roman independent soldier ethos thing, I've wondered exactly when they conformed to this norm and when they didn't.

The term 'comfortably' was added and might be throwing you. That's their max-load encumbrance.
The paper that I linked to earlier in the thread has some comments on it and has some footnotes for further reading.

As the Roman Legionnaires could be expected to march up to 32 kilometres per day and then fortify their night camp, they needed to be physically conditioned for such a task. 33 To prepare the Roman soldier to carry such loads and march long distances, Flavius Vegetius, in his work Epitoma rei militaris (Epitome of Military Science), recommended that recruits carry a load of up to 60 Roman pounds (19.6 kilograms), route marching at the ‘military step’ of 32 kilometres for five hours (a pace of 6.4 kilometres per hour) or at the ‘full step’ of 39 kilometres in the same time (a pace of 7.7 kilometres per hour). 3 4 This load did not include the soldier’s clothing and weapons, and was designed to condition the soldier to carry rations as well as arms during campaigns. 35
 

The paper that I linked to earlier in the thread has some comments on it and has some footnotes for further reading.
Yes, I have the Roth and Lothian papers on my digital nightstand*, thanks for the reference. I certainly know that that was the ideal set forth for the Roman soldier. I'm wondering how often that was actually put into practice. Supply lines and wagon trains and camp followers and all the, well, baggage of other armies appears to have definitely happened within Roman military behavior*, despite this idea. It'd be fascinating to know (as best we can, knowing that any evidence we have will be bottlenecked anecdotes of a whole) how often the ideal was adhered to. *The US public health world has just blown up, as you can undoubtedly understand, so it'll take me a while to get to. * will find reference when I can.
 



Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top