Some mechanisms (often ported from the old days) are putting the incentives in the wrong place - blog post discussion

[Eyes of Nine]

In this recent post by Trilemma Adventures creator Michael Prescott he muses about how for some rules the incentives are all wrong, so no wonder we just ignore those rules.

Why would any player track encumbrance when the best outcome is "no change" and the worst is a decrease in your overall effectiveness? Instead, make it so if you are "lightly" encumbered, you actually get some advantage/bonus like +1 to your attack rolls or something.

He applies similar thinking to rules that are often handwaved away like Light and Spell Components. Instead give a bonus when someone shines extra light (it's easier to find cool stuff) and when someone uses a special Spell component they get a nice bonus

And to me, the Bloodied condition in 4e was a great one for HP - of course you wanted to track the loss of those HP - you wanted to be able to use your bloodied-trigger powers!

Any other areas of your favorite games where the incentives are not in the right place?

Whose Mechanic is it Anyway?

Here's a simple principle: (1) The player who needs to use a quantity should be the one tracking it. If you're the one who updates your rog...

blog.trilemma.com

 

[Vexorg]

If the DM is tracking encumbrance penalty, conditions, exhaustion etc, they can write it on one sheet of paper and keep it on front of them.

 

[overgeeked]

I think the problem with encumbrance specifically is porting in part of the rules but not all of them. In TSR D&D the less encumbered you are the faster you could move. That was the benefit. That was also the part left behind.

As to the broader premise, yes, I agree. There should be both carrots and sticks in the rules. Though the modern version is only carrots and no sticks. Either way, if something matters enough to have subsystems for it, then it should provide at least a benefit. Advantage on perception checks in a brightly-lit room or some such.

 

[pemerton]

when someone uses a special Spell component they get a nice bonus

Did somebody say Torchbearer 2e?

 

[pemerton]

give a bonus when someone shines extra light (it's easier to find cool stuff)

I should have quoted this one too - in yesterday's Burning Wheel session I got a bonus die on my healing action because the other PC brought his Wyrd Lights in close to my patient.

(It didn't help - zero successes on nine dice meant that the poor patient died even though I had no lack of illumination.)

 

[John Dallman]

I think the problem with encumbrance specifically is porting in part of the rules but not all of them. In TSR D&D the less encumbered you are the faster you could move. That was the benefit. That was also the part left behind.

In GURPS, encumbrance reduces your movement and your dodge. Since dodging is a "free" way of trying to avoid getting hit, this creates a lot of motive to keep your load light.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

Why would any player track encumbrance when the best outcome is "no change" and the worst is a decrease in your overall effectiveness? Instead, make it so if you are "lightly" encumbered, you actually get some advantage/bonus like +1 to your attack rolls or something.

You mean, make ten louder and just go to ten?

 

[billd91]

I think the problem with encumbrance specifically is porting in part of the rules but not all of them. In TSR D&D the less encumbered you are the faster you could move. That was the benefit. That was also the part left behind.

Well, the variant encumbrance rules are right there and do slow characters with increasing encumbrance, so you could always use those.

As to the broader premise, yes, I agree. There should be both carrots and sticks in the rules. Though the modern version is only carrots and no sticks. Either way, if something matters enough to have subsystems for it, then it should provide at least a benefit. Advantage on perception checks in a brightly-lit room or some such.

Wait. You’re saying it’s currently all carrots and no sticks, and are proposing more carrots?!?

 

[the Jester]

Why would any player track encumbrance when the best outcome is "no change" and the worst is a decrease in your overall effectiveness?

Failing to track encumbrance (assuming the campaign uses it) because you might end up disadvantaged is missing the point of tracking encumbrance. It's basically cheating.

You track encumbrance (in campaigns that use it) because you're trying to enhance the realism of the game- you can't carry 200 lbs of coins without slowing down.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Encumbrance is one of those things that makes total sense to have, but the actual implementation is too tedious for many. I am not sure adding carrots to it would much help. In my game we in theory use encumbrance, but not in practice. It is more like "don't try to carry silly amount of stuff so we don't need to actually calculate this crap."