OSR What's your preferred encumbrance system?

[conankeep]

There has been so much iteration on encumbrance systems over the years even in OSR games alone.
Some games count each individual pound, others do abstract units, then there are slots, or games that only track treasure, or maybe only specific items.

What have you tried?
What is your favorite?
What would you change to make it perfect?

 

[Arilyn]

I prefer slots because it's quick and easy. I hate tracking weight but do want encumbrance to matter. The little Tetris puzzle with item cards in Mausritter is fun.

 

[500 Toads]

An abstraction like Pathfinder's "bulk" is fine to me.

I will say that if you do use actual specific units like pounds or kilograms rather than an abstraction, item weight should make sense. A two-handed steel sword meant to be wielded in combat by a mundane human soldier should not weigh 15 pounds, for instance; that's just grossly overweight.

 

[SableWyvern]

"Add up the weight of stuff" has always worked fine for me.

I don't expect everyone to be recalculating everything every time there is a change, but it's pretty straightforward to identify where your standard adventuring kit results in you sitting on the encumbrance scale, and then check again when there's an obvious necessity. Often, in a D&D gold-for-XP type game it's as much a question of, "How many hands will it take to carry all this stuff?" as it is "How much does it weigh?"

In my current Rolemaster game, the PCs have a wagon train with them and rarely need to carry food, extra water, bedrolls and all that kind of stuff on their person. However, they recently sent their men back to town while they ventured into a swamp, and weren't sure how long they'd be, so they went to the effort of checking on capacity, who's carrying food, etc. It took 10 - 15 minutes, which isn't much for one event in a game that's been running for 20 sessions.

Whenever I'm designing gsheet character sheets for a game where encumbrance might matter, I always include a "drop pack" check box, so people can easily move between "hiking" and "fighting" modes if applicable.

 

[sevenbastard]

I think the best way to handle encumbrance is to have a paid admin who monitor each characters equipment and determines in game impact.

They are also responsible for determining if items have to roll saving throws and such

"Point of order, Sazzbax the Indifferent didn't have his chalk powder in a waterproof container so when he fell into the river two days ago and it clumped all up so he cant use it to throw on the invisible stalker"

Trust me its $300 per session well spent.

 

[Zaukrie]

Ignore it mostly....or slots

 

[Koloth]

An abstraction like Pathfinder's "bulk" is fine to me.

I will say that if you do use actual specific units like pounds or kilograms rather than an abstraction, item weight should make sense. A two-handed steel sword meant to be wielded in combat by a mundane human soldier should not weigh 15 pounds, for instance; that's just grossly overweight.

Agree on the size/weight thing. Too many systems seem to think the 'heroic' sized weapons on many minis and artwork are real life usable. Some of those heroic weapons, if rendered in real life metal and wood, might weigh more then the person trying to pick it up.

But don't forget that the encumbrance weight of a weapon/item should also include the weight of the scabbard + belt/harness needed to carry the thing.

In most games, we don't worry too much about day to day encumbrance. In one game, the GM did a spot check and found our 'pack rat' player's character was trying to carry around something like 6 sets of studded leather, several crossbows, multiple firearm type things, axes and other random crap that we had found after encounters. Pretty much a shambling mound type of load. After much wailing and gnashing of teeth, the player relented and lighted the character's load. The character was some variation of high dex catfolk, not exactly the heavy load type of character.

 

[conankeep]

An abstraction like Pathfinder's "bulk" is fine to me.

That's a 2e thing right? Looks similar to how Into the Odd does encumbrance.
Even uses pretty much the same word.
I wonder if it[o] had influence on PF2e bulk system

 

[Gus L]

1. I've tried almost all of them: not caring, eyeballing it, the CN wright system, CN weight with "equipment", crossing off X's in containers/locations, and slots of various types.
2. I use a slot system that gives PCs around 6 to 14 items - with "purses" of coin, insignificant items, and bundles for ammunition/a few other items. I also use automatically encumbering items (for treasure - like carrying a fancy chair) and fragile items that have a 3/6 chance of being broken in combat etc.
3. I'm pretty happy with this system and it's well tested. It works well for shorter sessions as it keeps the amount of equipment reasonable and means things like light, food, and equipment selection are still issues. I tend to design dungeons with it in mind when it comes to treasure as well.

 

[500 Toads]

That's a 2e thing right? Looks similar to how Into the Odd does encumbrance.
Even uses pretty much the same word.
I wonder if it[o] had influence on PF2e bulk system

It's definitely in PF2e. Never looked into the first edition, so I don't know precisely when they adopted the system or precisely why.

There's negligible bulk (items less than a few ounces), bulk (roughly 5-10 pounds generally) and light bulk (everything in between; 10 light -> 1 bulk). Something like a backpack can hold up to 4 Bulk, of which 2 will be 'free'. Most of the fiddliness will come if there's gear sized for different characters, because there are adjustments to remember (e.g. equipment made for a large creature takes up double the Bulk, which is a concern if it's being carried by a medium creature as loot or w/e, while equipment for tiny creatures by default takes up half the standard bulk).