Arrows and why they matter?

[Leith]

I recently noted that none of my players track their ammunition. They track spells and magic items and even things like throwing daggers and axes but not arrows or bullets or bolts. I found this mildly annoying but ultimately didn't feel like policing their inventories cuz that's just more work for me. Then i was talking to another DM who advocated for tracking it themselves citing the gotcha moment when a player who hasn't been tracking their ammo runs out.

The question I have is simply, why should you track ammo? For me it just seems like an obvious thing that you do like tracking how many hp you have and what weapons you're carrying. But it's not just my players who don't bother, most people don't seem to. And the reason varies from the tedium to the fact that 5gp buys 100 arrow/bolts and that's not a lot of money.

But if i'm the one tracking the ammo for everyone... the question is why do it? Would I just be covering for my players laziness by sacrificing my laziness? Or do I do it for the gotcha moment? Tracking mundane expendables does open doors for issues like finding food and water, crafting arrows or just having to choose whether to use your bow or save your ammo. What is the point? Where is the fun?

[darknite]

Yeah, most players don't want to keep track of ammo and usually not worth the hassle of doing it for many adventures. However for adventures that are away from resupply for considerable times, for example when I ran Tomb of Annihilation and the PCs were locked in, I required expendable ammo to be tracked.

That said, I've got a high level archer that can fire a full quiver worth of arrows in a combat. That guy has a Bag of Holding that carries 25 extra quivers (each sealed with a leather cap to keep the arrows in place) and just buys 25 quivers when completing an adventure, assuming any previously unused arrows were used for practice.

[ad_hoc]

Is it fun?

[Sigreid]

My players track ammo. It actually is important when the party is in the field for an extended time, unable to replenish. That said, I dont police my players. They're adults responsible to know and tend to their characters.

[Tanarii]

It'd make sense if the encumberance rules didnt allow you to carry 30 quivers of 20 arrows without batting an eye.

Seriously, it's like no D&D designer from gygax on up has ever gone to an archery range. As far as I know rven AD&D's bulk rules didn't make it remotely realistic.

[Guy Lombard-O]

What is the point? Where is the fun?

Exactly.

There's enough math and note taking involved in D&D already, so something that (usually) seems so pointless doesn't usually get much attention in our group. Like other posters mentioned, sometimes in extended forays into wilderness it's different, and you keep track of rations and water and arrows. But usually it's really not adding much to the game.

Plus, if you make your martial characters keep track of arrows on a regular basis, that's just one more reason to play a caster instead.

[MaxWilson]

I recently noted that none of my players track their ammunition. They track spells and magic items and even things like throwing daggers and axes but not arrows or bullets or bolts. I found this mildly annoying but ultimately didn't feel like policing their inventories cuz that's just more work for me. Then i was talking to another DM who advocated for tracking it themselves citing the gotcha moment when a player who hasn't been tracking their ammo runs out.

I would only do this in an adventure for which I expected it to be an issue, e.g. a megadungeon crawl or a shipwreck. There's no point burning a bunch of mental energy on arithmetic if I know that they're not going to run out anyway.

At the point where I become aware that logistics might be an issue, I would just ask, "How many arrows do you think you'd be carrying right now?"


The question I have is simply, why should you track ammo? For me it just seems like an obvious thing that you do like tracking how many hp you have and what weapons you're carrying. But it's not just my players who don't bother, most people don't seem to. And the reason varies from the tedium to the fact that 5gp buys 100 arrow/bolts and that's not a lot of money.

I'm pretty flexible, not just on how many arrows you're carrying, but even what weapons ("Sure, it seems reasonable you would have brought more than one javelin for this assault, regardless of what's written on your pregenerated character sheet") and what proficiencies ("okay new player, you're a Dwarven Battlerager and you know some extra skills and languages, but instead of spending a bunch of time deciding that right now, just let me know during play if we come across a language and you think you would likely know it--we can make that one of your languages on the spot. Ditto for skills like sneaking.").


But if i'm the one tracking the ammo for everyone... the question is why do it? Would I just be covering for my players laziness by sacrificing my laziness? Or do I do it for the gotcha moment? Tracking mundane expendables does open doors for issues like finding food and water, crafting arrows or just having to choose whether to use your bow or save your ammo. What is the point? Where is the fun?

General rule here IMO is "don't waste table time on stuff that doesn't matter." You're the DM, you know better than anyone what is likely to matter in the current scenario. Optimize play around the actual human beings sitting at the table.

[Vogie]

When I want my players to track something, I make tools to give to them to help them do just that.

For example, my encumbrance variant is based on a number of minecraft-style slots based on each character's strength. Instead of just giving them a paragraph-long spiel during session zero and hope they figure it out, I made little laminated cards for each player with 20 boxes, an explanation of what defines a slot (below) and then told them to scratch out the boxes beyond their strength score (a 15 Str character has 15 slots, an 8 Str Character gets 8, et cetera)



Slots
Size


1
Light (<5 lbs)


2
Medium (5<20 lbs)


4
Heavy (20<80 lbs)


0
Worn Equipment, 1 pack


1
Coins (20<1000)




If you want to have them track ammo, give them the tools to easily track ammo - I'd suggest an ammunition card that they can count down their used arrows with a paperclip, a la Deadlands. If you don't want to make something, you can just provide something equivalent (for example, this (https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B0786TCVYL/ref=nav_timeline_asin?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1) or this (https://smile.amazon.com/Litko-Game-Accessories-WHv8-Command/dp/B073XW4RLF/ref=pd_cp_21_2?pd_rd_w=ADzT7&pf_rd_p=ef4dc990-a9ca-4945-ae0b-f8d549198ed6&pf_rd_r=0DN21GQJ2SSPSK5TFB19&pd_rd_r=ca379c79-8864-11e9-8c66-a517f00d9800&pd_rd_wg=32cNt&pd_rd_i=B073XW4RLF&psc=1&refRID=0DN21GQJ2SSPSK5TFB19)). Otherwise, just have them drop a gold or two whenever they spend money anywhere.

[Sigreid]

Exactly.

There's enough math and note taking involved in D&D already, so something that (usually) seems so pointless doesn't usually get much attention in our group. Like other posters mentioned, sometimes in extended forays into wilderness it's different, and you keep track of rations and water and arrows. But usually it's really not adding much to the game.

Plus, if you make your martial characters keep track of arrows on a regular basis, that's just one more reason to play a caster instead.

There was quite a bit of fun when the arcane archer was down to 3 arrows in a do or die fight.

[Glorthindel]

Is it fun?

This arguement could be made for anything that makes a players life even remotely inconvenient. Is tracking copper and silver pieces fun? I'll bet nearly all the people saying "arrows cost nothing, whats the point" meticulously track units of currency smaller than the cost of a quiver of arrows. Drawing the "fun" line above arrows and rations but below throwing weapons and silver pieces is no more arbitrary than drawing it above silver pieces or below arrows.

Ultimately it is down to fun, but fun is far from universal. Hell, I enjoyed collecting spell components when I played a wizard, and I throughlly love mapping dungeons as my character explores them, but I guess that makes me mentally damaged to the modern gamer.

[Guy Lombard-O]

There was quite a bit of fun when the arcane archer was down to 3 arrows in a do or die fight.

Well, I could see where that would be interesting. I'm certainly not opposed to the idea if the DM wants us to do it, and the players in my group are more than capable of (honestly) tracking such things whenever the DM thinks it's important.

For instance, I've played ToA where we carefully tracked food, water, and ammunition...at least for a while. Without intending to, we sort of wrecked a lot of the mundane aspects of the jungles by picking characters who seemed appropriate for the known broad strokes of the setting. I picked a lizardman Barb/Druid (how often are you going to get the chance to Wildshape into dinos, after all?!?). Between his ability to craft simple tools/weapons (arrows) from the bones of fallen foes, to Goodberry and Purify or Create water, much of the process got short circuited (oops).

But I also feel like, if I were told to track such things as arrows, I'd make certain that I carried them in bulk and informed the DM of a standing practice of refilling my fighting quivers to full (60? 80? 100?) from the packs, and searching for my arrows (1/2 recovery, right?) after every encounter. Also, I'd make sure to pick up Carpenter's tools proficiency in my downtime as I leveled up (or whichever one it is that lets you make arrows).

I'd think such behavior would be pretty standard for a PC in such a game. And actually running out of ammo (and thus providing the kind of exciting choice you experienced) would be pretty darn rare. Which brings it full circle back to "why bother"? (with the exception of deep/extended wilderness/dungeon crawl campaigns).

[noob]

Counting them can either cause boltdwarf(that carts around bolts, have a crossbow which makes bolts and does not needs bolts to fire and a quiver that makes bolts) or just make people use melee weapons

[Leith]

General rule here IMO is "don't waste table time on stuff that doesn't matter." You're the DM, you know better than anyone what is likely to matter in the current scenario. Optimize play around the actual human beings sitting at the table.

But as the DM you are the one who decides what is important in the hopes of generating drama and fun. And while I agree that there can be fun generated by tracking incidental things like ammo, if no one is doing it, you have to ask why? After all...


When I want my players to track something, I make tools to give to them to help them do just that.

*clipped*

If you want to have them track ammo, give them the tools to easily track ammo - I'd suggest an ammunition card that they can count down their used arrows with a paperclip, a la Deadlands. If you don't want to make something, you can just provide something equivalent (for example, this (https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B0786TCVYL/ref=nav_timeline_asin?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1) or this (https://smile.amazon.com/Litko-Game-Accessories-WHv8-Command/dp/B073XW4RLF/ref=pd_cp_21_2?pd_rd_w=ADzT7&pf_rd_p=ef4dc990-a9ca-4945-ae0b-f8d549198ed6&pf_rd_r=0DN21GQJ2SSPSK5TFB19&pd_rd_r=ca379c79-8864-11e9-8c66-a517f00d9800&pd_rd_wg=32cNt&pd_rd_i=B073XW4RLF&psc=1&refRID=0DN21GQJ2SSPSK5TFB19)). Otherwise, just have them drop a gold or two whenever they spend money anywhere.

Its not that hard to track ammo. Encumbrance sure, but ammo is just a number like hp. Erase and rewrite. Players do it all the time for stuff like spells and special abilities.


This arguement could be made for anything that makes a players life even remotely inconvenient. Is tracking copper and silver pieces fun? I'll bet nearly all the people saying "arrows cost nothing, whats the point" meticulously track units of currency smaller than the cost of a quiver of arrows. Drawing the "fun" line above arrows and rations but below throwing weapons and silver pieces is no more arbitrary than drawing it above silver pieces or below arrows.

Ultimately it is down to fun, but fun is far from universal. Hell, I enjoyed collecting spell components when I played a wizard, and I throughlly love mapping dungeons as my character explores them, but I guess that makes me mentally damaged to the modern gamer.

This^

I've considered using various methods of encouraging players to track ammo and encumbrance but often I come back to the facts that; a) it's not super important and is unlikely to come up; and b) it's not that friggin hard to do and still only half the players do it, at best.

I guess I just have to decide if it is worth it to me. I don't think anyone will mind if I just track ammo (and even encumbrance) for them if I warn them when they're running low. Plus there is the old school issue of "how do we get 7000lbs of treasure out of this dungeon and back to town?" That is an interesting question.

[stoutstien]

My players track bolts and arrows same as S,V,M, spell slots, HP, and just about everything else on their sheets. It's a honor system and if a player really didn't want to track arrows I'd come up with something but so for it hasn't been needed

[crayzz]

The fun of arrow counting comes from the risk of running out. In most situations, that risk isnt high enough to matter (you're able to resupply often enough and carry enough that you wont realistically run out any time soon).

I enforce arrow counting if there is a risk (they're trapped behind enemy lines, they were kidnapped and only have access to a small supply stash, whatever), but otherwise it's just kinda needless work.

If you want, give your party a resupply cost (say, 10gp) they can spend every time they visit a village or w/e. Make the cost a bit more than they would spend if they were tracking. Lazy players can just eat the cost, meticulous players get to save a bit of money.

[Kyutaru]

It'd make sense if the encumberance rules didnt allow you to carry 30 quivers of 20 arrows without batting an eye.

Seriously, it's like no D&D designer from gygax on up has ever gone to an archery range. As far as I know rven AD&D's bulk rules didn't make it remotely realistic.

Except you're only allowed to wear a single quiver at a time. Reloading would constitute digging through your oversized knapsack for yet another one. With how higher level arrow feats in past editions encouraged arrow spam and how 2nd edition had you firing up to 10 shots per round with buffs, running out was a real concern.

Though primarily I think the ammo cost also gets prohibitively more expensive if you're using DR properly because normal arrows become effectively useless. You now needed to keep stocks of +1 arrows or +3 arrows in older editions to even harm a thing with resistance to normal weapons. The bow didn't contribute its enhancement to the arrows.

[stoutstien]

Except you're only allowed to wear a single quiver at a time. Reloading would constitute digging through your oversized knapsack for yet another one. With how higher level arrow feats in past editions encouraged arrow spam and how 2nd edition had you firing up to 10 shots per round with buffs, running out was a real concern.

Though primarily I think the ammo cost also gets prohibitively more expensive if you're using DR properly because normal arrows become effectively useless. You now needed to keep stocks of +1 arrows or +3 arrows in older editions to even harm a thing with resistance to normal weapons. The bow didn't contribute its enhancement to the arrows.

Where is the only one quiver equipped at one time. rule coming from?

[Gallowglass]

It really depends on the game/campaign.

In a lower-level survivalist campaign, monitoring the logistics is part of the game. Suddenly, players spend time figuring out how much food and waterskins to load on the wagon for the four month trip into the wilderness, how many new arrows they can make a night while camping, etc. etc.

But in a high-adventure campaign, it can be annoying, irritating and a waste of time. Who cares if the archer has 20 or 25 arrows when the wizard is doing the heavy lifting anyway.

I have been in many of both types of campaigns. As a DM I rarely make them track ammo or rations past 3rd to 5th level or so, but they are usually adventuring in or near a stable civilization structure. If I send them off on a weeks long wilderness trek, I make them switch to logistics mode and track stuff.

That being said, an inordinate number of my players invest early in rings of sustenance or play characters that don't need food or water or can provide their own with cantrips.

[xroads]

I like the way Savage Worlds handles ammo usage. Basically, a playing card is drawn at the end of encounter. Depending on what is pulled, the players either still have ammo or they're out of ammo.

Something like this might work for D&D. Perhaps each player that fired a shot rolls a d20. If they roll a 1, then they are out of ammo.

It's certainly something that would have to be discussed with the group though.

[ad_hoc]

This arguement could be made for anything that makes a players life even remotely inconvenient. Is tracking copper and silver pieces fun? I'll bet nearly all the people saying "arrows cost nothing, whats the point" meticulously track units of currency smaller than the cost of a quiver of arrows. Drawing the "fun" line above arrows and rations but below throwing weapons and silver pieces is no more arbitrary than drawing it above silver pieces or below arrows.

Ultimately it is down to fun, but fun is far from universal. Hell, I enjoyed collecting spell components when I played a wizard, and I throughlly love mapping dungeons as my character explores them, but I guess that makes me mentally damaged to the modern gamer.

I find it fun to track money.

I don't find it fun to track arrows.

So I do the former but not the latter.

I would play in a game which hand waved money if other players didn't find it fun. An easy way to do that would be to have a party wealth level. They can buy whatever they want as long as it is reasonable to their level of wealth.

[noob]

Except you're only allowed to wear a single quiver at a time. Reloading would constitute digging through your oversized knapsack for yet another one. With how higher level arrow feats in past editions encouraged arrow spam and how 2nd edition had you firing up to 10 shots per round with buffs, running out was a real concern.

Though primarily I think the ammo cost also gets prohibitively more expensive if you're using DR properly because normal arrows become effectively useless. You now needed to keep stocks of +1 arrows or +3 arrows in older editions to even harm a thing with resistance to normal weapons. The bow didn't contribute its enhancement to the arrows.

Are you aware harming the action economy of archers harms their fighting style which already needs way more effort than just two handing a melee weapon and using power attack risk to lower further the use of archery?

[LibraryOgre]

In most games, ammo is like rations. Early on, when money is scarce (if you're starting poor), it's worthwhile to track such things. As levels mount up and you wind up tipping potboys platinum pieces for carrying away your night soil, tracking rations only matters when you are in a scarcity situation.

[MaxWilson]

There was quite a bit of fun when the arcane archer was down to 3 arrows in a do or die fight.

Sure, it's fun. But how often would it happen that way even if you do track arrows? If he usually uses two quivers per adventures, he'll just bring five quivers of arrows.

If on the other hand you let dragonfire/Fireballs/etc. wreck magical and nonmagical equipment, now we suddenly have lots of scenarios where having only a few arrows left is actually plausible.

[Gallowglass]

Sure, it's fun. But how often would it happen that way even if you do track arrows? If he usually uses two quivers per adventures, he'll just bring five quivers of arrows.

If on the other hand you let dragonfire/Fireballs/etc. wreck magical and nonmagical equipment, now we suddenly have lots of scenarios where having only a few arrows left is actually plausible.

The answer is every archer needs to get a trait that gives them access to that force bolt spell, or whatever spell requires an arrow/bolt for a spell component, then pick up a set of mundane wizard's spell component pouches that always have the low-cost components in it without being tracked and they are good to go.

Why should only the T1 classes get the no-cost mundane infinite equipment tricks?

[noob]

The answer is every archer needs to get a trait that gives them access to that force bolt spell, or whatever spell requires an arrow/bolt for a spell component, then pick up a set of mundane wizard's spell component pouches that always have the low-cost components in it without being tracked and they are good to go.

Why should only the T1 classes get the no-cost mundane infinite equipment tricks?

Spell component pouches for the win.

[Cicciograna]

About the matter of tracking consummables, I always wanted to use the interesting rules (https://web.archive.org/web/20130613034002/http://intwischa.com/2011/05/house-rule-for-tracking-ammo) I found, a long time ago, on the IntWisCha blog.

The system makes the tracking of consummables more interesting and seems to blend in well with the D&D combat paradygm that a single attack roll doesn't represent a "single attack", but rather reflects the process of bobbing, moving around, threatening the opponent with one's weapon, exchanging blows trying to find an opening in his defense. Also, as the author of the rules comments, this way the number of available arrows doesn't really count until you're down to the last dice, or the last arrow.

Mechanically, I remember that I wrote a small program to study the distribution of the number of fired arrows starting from a d12, IIRC, and I definitely remember that my results confirmed what he says, for an average of 40 arrows which is entirely respectable.

[Leith]

I like the way Savage Worlds handles ammo usage. Basically, a playing card is drawn at the end of encounter. Depending on what is pulled, the players either still have ammo or they're out of ammo.

Something like this might work for D&D. Perhaps each player that fired a shot rolls a d20. If they roll a 1, then they are out of ammo.

It's certainly something that would have to be discussed with the group though.

Yes, this is where drama comes in. But with this method you remove the element of choice. You don't know when your going to run out and so you can't plan for it. So which is better: tracking the ammo, an ammo tax to be paid at an arbitrary time, or randomly running out?

[Gallowglass]

Yes, this is where drama comes in. But with this method you remove the element of choice. You don't know when your going to run out and so you can't plan for it. So which is better: tracking the ammo, an ammo tax to be paid at an arbitrary time, or randomly running out?

Seems like a question that will vary from person to person, game to game.

Some players don't want to track, don't want the drama. They would be fine with dropping a tax of 50 gp each week or each trip to town so they don't have to worry about it.

Some players like tracking, like ticking the ammo boxes and want to track versus having to spend more money than necessary or deal with randomness

Some players like drama, like the idea of reaching back and finding only two arrows left in their quiver and still 20 hobgoblins left to deal with. What do they do now?!

[Mellack]

This arguement could be made for anything that makes a players life even remotely inconvenient. Is tracking copper and silver pieces fun? I'll bet nearly all the people saying "arrows cost nothing, whats the point" meticulously track units of currency smaller than the cost of a quiver of arrows. Drawing the "fun" line above arrows and rations but below throwing weapons and silver pieces is no more arbitrary than drawing it above silver pieces or below arrows.

Ultimately it is down to fun, but fun is far from universal. Hell, I enjoyed collecting spell components when I played a wizard, and I throughlly love mapping dungeons as my character explores them, but I guess that makes me mentally damaged to the modern gamer.

Our group doesn't even worry about copper or silver after late tier 2. We tend to leave that in the dungeon, or give it to any hirelings/npcs around. It just isn't worth carrying. We will just round things to the nearest gold piece at that level when purchasing.
As to ammo, we won't worry about it unless under unusual circumstances. Otherwise, carry a couple of quivers (I see no rule or reason you can't), plus have a couple of more on a mount or bag of holding.

[Man_Over_Game]

On the OP's topic, it's basically the same problem as encumbrance.

If you make it important, you're adding a lot of things for players to track, and it becomes a game of managing your inventory.

If you make it worthless, entire features of the game are removed or made redundant (like how some races increase carrying capacity, or some magic removes the need to track arrows).

So where's that line?


In terms of encumbrance, the easiest thing would be to make a good encumbrance system. Like being able to choose a number of items based on your Strength attribute, or something, and a case of arrows is worth 1 point. Rations (mostly water) is actually a lot of weight, and you'd be surprised how fast you go through a couple gallons. A Wildland Firefighter goes through 1 liter of water in an hour of hard work, so two gallons is 8 hours of hard labor. Just say that one day's worth of supplies is worth 5 points of Encumbrance (5 Strength), and people will start making some hard choices.

In terms of arrow capacity, exact numbers probably aren't important. Roll a d20 at the end of battle. If you roll 10 or less, the quiver is now at half capacity. If you roll 10 or less when it's at half-capacity, it's now empty. If you spend some time searching for arrows after the battle (about 10 minutes), you can make these rolls with Advantage. Pretty simple solution for roughly tracking the number of arrows. These numbers are based on the fact that a case holds up to 12 arrows, combat usually lasts 3 rounds, meaning that you'll generally run out of arrows by the 4th combat without scavenging for replacements.

[OutOfThyme]

In terms of encumbrance, the easiest thing would be to make a good encumbrance system. Like being able to choose a number of items based on your Strength attribute, or something, and a case of arrows is worth 1 point. Rations (mostly water) is actually a lot of weight, and you'd be surprised how fast you go through a couple gallons. A Wildland Firefighter goes through 1 liter of water in an hour of hard work, so two gallons is 8 hours of hard labor.

In terms of arrow capacity, exact numbers probably aren't important. Roll a d20. If you roll 10 or less, the quiver is now at half capacity. If you roll 10 or less when it's at half-capacity, it's now empty. If you spend some time searching for arrows after the battle (about 10 minutes), you can make these rolls with Advantage. Pretty simple solution for roughly tracking the number of arrows. These numbers are based on the fact that a case holds up to 12 arrows, combat usually lasts 3 rounds, meaning that you'll generally run out of arrows by the 4th combat without scavenging for replacements.So Giffyglyph's Darker Dungeons (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ufAyAnP4YTyJmOvyFQwnJZoTMTe95ETt/view) has systems for both of those things, and along the lines that you're describing.

For encumbrance, the document breaks it down into slots. You have a number of slots dictated by your size (15 for small, 18 for Medium) plus your strength modifier, and items take up capacity based on their size. It's definitely less tedious than tracking everything individually.

I really like the arrow system, too. If you buy 20 arrows, you start off with a d12 ammunition die (although you can upgrade to a d20 die, which represents ~30 arrows). If you roll a 1, you downgrade the die size as follows: d12 -> d10 -> d8 -> d6 -> d4 -> 1. When you're at 1, you only have one shot. Then, you're out. You also pay attention to the smallest ammunition pool, so while you can carry more than 1 quiver of arrows, it can be a dramatic situation in the heat of battle. I'd probably allow something like the "searching for expended ammunition" rule, too.

[xroads]

Yes, this is where drama comes in. But with this method you remove the element of choice. You don't know when your going to run out and so you can't plan for it. So which is better: tracking the ammo, an ammo tax to be paid at an arbitrary time, or randomly running out?

It certainly has potential for drama. I merely mention it as a possibility. It relieves the burden of ammo tracking while retaining a small level tactical consideration in the game. Ex. Do I as a player want to engage in a small skirmish with my bow knowing I may not have ammo for a potentially bigger fight?

Ultimately, like Gallowgas said, it's really up to you and your group. I don't think any of us can really answer which is better.

For reference, I think the SW system called this the "Cinematic Ammo" rule or something like that. The rule was inspired by movies where you see the protaganist firing recklessly with what seems to be an infinite ammo supply. But then suddenly, at a climatic moment, the ammo runs out. What does the hero do now? :eek:

[Contrast]

Are you aware harming the action economy of archers harms their fighting style which already needs way more effort than just two handing a melee weapon and using power attack risk to lower further the use of archery?

Was this meant to be sarcastic? The forum habit is to use blue text to denote that if you weren't aware.

If not, archery is better than melee in that you get archery fighting style and sharpshooter meaning you can do what the melee guy can do except with a bonus to hit and also to an enemy flying 600ft up in the air :smallconfused: The only downside is that depending on party make up the other members of the party might have been hoping that the fighter would stand in melee - of course Crossbow Expert also means you can do that as well (and get more attacks than your 2h friend in the bargain).

[Man_Over_Game]

Was this meant to be sarcastic? The forum habit is to use blue text to denote that if you weren't aware.

If not, archery is better than melee in that you get archery fighting style and sharpshooter meaning you can do what the melee guy can do except with a bonus to hit and also to an enemy flying 600ft up in the air :smallconfused: The only downside is that depending on party make up the other members of the party might have been hoping that the fighter would stand in melee - of course Crossbow Expert also means you can do that as well (and get more attacks than your 2h friend in the bargain).

I'm pretty sure he's describing why things did/didn't work in prior editions, which is what someone else brought up regarding arrow capacity.

[Pex]

Sometimes realism should shut up, go away, and let the fun commence. Technically one should track arrows, but it's the same minutiae detail as tracking rations. You want to play an adventurer not a bookkeeper. It should be enough for a player to say he restocks arrows when in a town for the courtesy to realism and get on with the game.

How is this different from tracking spell slots? You get back your spell slots after a long rest. You can have several long rests before you get to the next town. You're always resupplied with spell slots. What's an archer to do when out of arrows, spend his action twiddling his thumbs? For one particular combat when this could happen, fine. The archer goes into melee or uses the Help Action or take care of that combat's Mcguffin while the rest of the party holds off the bad guys. As an every adventure result because the quiver always becomes empty the player doesn't get to play the character he wanted.

[Man_Over_Game]

[...] What's an archer to do when out of arrows, spend his action twiddling his thumbs? For one particular combat when this could happen, fine. The archer goes into melee or uses the Help Action or take care of that combat's Mcguffin while the rest of the party holds off the bad guys. As an every adventure result because the quiver always becomes empty the player doesn't get to play the character he wanted.

But an archer is never "just" an archer. Just because a Paladin's features often require a melee attack doesn't mean that Paladin is useless against a flying creature. If a barbarian can throw a javelin, an "archer" can pull out a rapier.

In fact, "archer" is less of an archetype than a melee character. There are a massive plethora of abilities that require a melee attack. But for ranged attacks, I can only think of a few, very rare cases:


A Hunter Ranger who explicitly invested into Volley.
1 of the 2 options for a Rogue's Sneak Attack.
The Archery Fighting Style
Arcane Archer features
Feats (Skulker, Crossbow Expert, Sharpshooter).


There's really only one subclass that's rendered useless in melee combat (Arcane Archer). But how many subclasses would be rendered useless if they were forced to fight in ranged combat? Just off the top of my head:


Cavalier Fighter
Almost every Barbarian
Swashbuckler Rogue
Almost every Paladin subclass
Moon Druid
War Cleric
Almost every Monk subclass
Sword Bard

That's before including all of the melee-specific feats, fighting styles and spells.

My point is, ranged characters can suck it up. Whatever they have to deal with, melee characters have it worse.

[Renduaz]

Ah, the woes of being stuck 20 years in the past behind the Digital Age. Even WOTC themselves are trying to popularize what Roll20 players and others have been doing for years with apps like D&D Beyond. You don't need to 'track' anything anymore, you could even get a script that deducts a projectile every time you make an attack roll if you're making the roll digitally. But if not, then you could just tick down the minus button on an online counter when you roll the dice in a split second, which is much less than it's going to take for you to see where the dice landed, do the math, and for the DM to write it down overall.

[Man_Over_Game]

Ah, the woes of being stuck 20 years in the past behind the Digital Age. Even WOTC themselves are trying to popularize what Roll20 players and others have been doing for years with apps like D&D Beyond. You don't need to 'track' anything anymore, you could even get a script that deducts a projectile every time you make an attack roll if you're making the roll digitally. But if not, then you could just tick down the minus button on an online counter when you roll the dice in a split second, which is much less than it's going to take for you to see where the dice landed, do the math, and for the DM to write it down overall.

There was a thread I made about using technology/apps as an active part of a TTRPG's design scheme. Tracking individual numbers/variables was one of the more popular uses, but I didn't consider tracking ammunition. That's a really solid idea.

Would make for a really cool mech TTRPG, where you use your phone as your mech's User Interface.

[Misterwhisper]

I will ask people to keep track of arrows as soon as I see a dm asking the wizard how much of each component he has left... so never.

[Man_Over_Game]

I will ask people to keep track of arrows as soon as I see a dm asking the wizard how much of each component he has left... so never.

Wizards (and every full caster) can use a focus, which replaces the need for any material components. Additionally, most components aren't lost after casting a spell.

If a component was lost, and a focus can't replace it, I'd darn well demand that the Wizard tracked his components. No casting Magic Mouth/Raise Dead for free!

[Chronos]

Do you track when your players use the bathroom, and start calling for Con saves whenever they've been holding it too long? No, of course not, except in extraordinary circumstances. You just assume that, at appropriate times, they've been ducking behind a tree or something and taking care of it, without it ever needing to be explicitly mentioned.

Likewise, except in extraordinary circumstances, you just assume that, whenever the archer is in a town, he buys up as many arrows as he'll need, without it ever needing to be explicitly mentioned.

[Renduaz]

I will ask people to keep track of arrows as soon as I see a dm asking the wizard how much of each component he has left... so never.

Fun Fact: By RAW, spell components which are free are abstracted away (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/861636231947362310?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5E tweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E861636231947362310&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sageadvice.eu%2F2017%2F0 6%2F16%2Fis-the-intent-behind-a-component-pouch-that-you-reach-into%2F) from a component pouch, if only because Crawford asserted as much and his tweets are errata. As far as I know, he never asserted that ammunition is abstracted away, so that would not be RAW.

Obviously I understand that the answers given in this thread are personal considerations ( Or 'house rules' more technically ), but I thought it would be funny to point out how it just so happens that Wizard slacking has been given official permission, but not ammunition.

[Man_Over_Game]

Do you track when your players use the bathroom, and start calling for Con saves whenever they've been holding it too long? No, of course not, except in extraordinary circumstances. You just assume that, at appropriate times, they've been ducking behind a tree or something and taking care of it, without it ever needing to be explicitly mentioned.

Likewise, except in extraordinary circumstances, you just assume that, whenever the archer is in a town, he buys up as many arrows as he'll need, without it ever needing to be explicitly mentioned.

With all of the mentions of people ignoring portions of the game except in difficult areas, maybe that's how the game SHOULD have been. Rather than focusing on various subsystems, focus on one that requires additional hardship.

Like, for example, being in a Civilized area has no impact on your rations, weight, travel distance, or ammunition, no matter how much you fight. Wilderness areas impose some difficulty, especially if you stick around longer. Barren areas require tools or skills to ensure that you have enough resources for adventuring, and may require additional setup/safety to ensure a Long Rest without Exhaustion.


It might sound odd, but ask yourself when you consider things like Carrying Capacity, Rations, Ammunition, Exhaustion, Cold/Hot weather conditions, etc. all become relevant. Because, to me, they all seem to start becoming relevant at the same times.


Fun Fact: By RAW, spell components which are free are abstracted away (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/861636231947362310?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5E tweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E861636231947362310&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sageadvice.eu%2F2017%2F0 6%2F16%2Fis-the-intent-behind-a-component-pouch-that-you-reach-into%2F) from a component pouch, if only because Crawford asserted as much and his tweets are errata. As far as I know, he never asserted that ammunition is abstracted away, so that would not be RAW.

Obviously I understand that the answers given in this thread are personal considerations ( Or 'house rules' more technically ), but I thought it would be funny to point out how it just so happens that Wizard slacking has been given official permission, but not ammunition.

His tweets are no longer errata. It's still "advice", as in, how he rules it, but it's not an official ruling (as in, an Adventure League ruling), until it shows up on the official Errata documentation. It's no longer a law, but an opinion that might become law. Some people value his opinion, others don't. As for me, I just consider it advice from someone with more experience. Advice doesn't mean they're right, but it means it's worth listening to.

[Vogie]

Like, for example, being in a Civilized area has no impact on your rations, weight, travel distance, or ammunition, no matter how much you fight. Wilderness areas impose some difficulty, especially if you stick around longer. Barren areas require tools or skills to ensure that you have enough resources for adventuring, and may require additional setup/safety to ensure a Long Rest without Exhaustion.


It might sound odd, but ask yourself when you consider things like Carrying Capacity, Rations, Ammunition, Exhaustion, Cold/Hot weather conditions, etc. all become relevant. Because, to me, they all seem to start becoming relevant at the same times.

100%.

For example, the main group I'm running is in Waterdeep right now - there's a vendor at every corner, and they're chummy with the blacksmiths next door. Yet I'm introducing the mechanics of these things for when we finish W:DH, and either go into the megadungeon of DotMM or if they get on a boat (which I'll follow Ghosts of Saltmarsh for), or if they decide to leave Waterdeep and wander into the Forgotten Realms outside the walls.

[Willie the Duck]

I recently noted that none of my players track their ammunition. They track spells and magic items and even things like throwing daggers and axes but not arrows or bullets or bolts. I found this mildly annoying but ultimately didn't feel like policing their inventories cuz that's just more work for me. Then i was talking to another DM who advocated for tracking it themselves citing the gotcha moment when a player who hasn't been tracking their ammo runs out.

The question I have is simply, why should you track ammo? For me it just seems like an obvious thing that you do like tracking how many hp you have and what weapons you're carrying. But it's not just my players who don't bother, most people don't seem to. And the reason varies from the tedium to the fact that 5gp buys 100 arrow/bolts and that's not a lot of money.

But if i'm the one tracking the ammo for everyone... the question is why do it? Would I just be covering for my players laziness by sacrificing my laziness? Or do I do it for the gotcha moment? Tracking mundane expendables does open doors for issues like finding food and water, crafting arrows or just having to choose whether to use your bow or save your ammo. What is the point? Where is the fun?

Early in the game/in the early version of the game, the answers to tracking were clear -- rations, torches/lantern oil, and arrows were expendables that cost weight (and gold). You only had so much encumbrance. Encumbrance that you had left over at the end of the adventure was how many coins you could carry out of a dungeon. This was really important because ~90% of your xp was derived by how many gold pieces worth of treasure you could successfully bring back to town. This created a dynamic tension where you were trying to plan out scarce resources (gold, equipment, and lack of equipment/encumbrance space). As a challenge, this could be quite fun.

Gaming tastes changed, and the whole dungeon heist game, while never really disappearing, certainly lost its dominance. 2e AD&D made xp for gp optional, and 3e+ replaced it altogether (with xp mostly for successful combat, which created its own incentivization structure). Nothing ever has been put in place of that old system to make the tracking of such scarce resources specifically fun excepting when an enterprising DM chooses to make it a focus of their game.

And it can be fun... so long as everyone is on board. And, if you want to do it for the whole kit and caboodle, you have to specifically sacrifice some things. Torches/lantern oil will only be fun to track if everyone doesn't have dark vision/the light cantrip. Tracking of rations only works if you don't have goodberry (one thing D&D is known for is including spells which trivialize/defang any given thing that you might otherwise spend a lot of time/derive enjoyment from working around). Encumbrance will probably have to be tracked overall, and that will make the hill dwarf cleric (and Str-dumping anything, really) care about their strength score. The archers will probably have to figure out what to do when they do run out of arrows (slings are cheap, rocks are plentiful, but there's also switch hitting to shield and finesse melee weapon). You might want to consider what kind of skills (tool proficiency?) and equipment might be needed to craft new arrows in the wild (a sack of 100 arrowheads should be a lot less cumbersome than 100 arrows). All of this will greatly reinforce the incentives for someone who might want to play an archer to instead consider a warlock EB-spammer, so you'll have to figure out what you want to do about that. The real issue is that you really need buy in from people to make it be fun. Otherwise, yes, it does just become a burden/potential for 'gotcha' moment.


It'd make sense if the encumberance rules didnt allow you to carry 30 quivers of 20 arrows without batting an eye

Seriously, it's like no D&D designer from gygax on up has ever gone to an archery range. As far as I know rven AD&D's bulk rules didn't make it remotely realistic.

I think the assumption that the designers weren't aware that they were making a grand simplification is unlikely. Know and care are strongly different qualities, and even beyond that, they knew they had to contend with gamers who themselves might not care, and specifically chose their battles to favor the things that they specifically considered important. Gygax, in particular, was very fussy about some things (such as the relative price of battle axe vs sword being at least somewhat historic, or the names of various polearms :smalltongue:), and very unfussy about others (the prices on the equipment list overall informing a nonsensical economy), and some things being absolutely unflinchingly gamist (coins all weighing 1/10th of a pound specifically so that people would track the encumbrance of their treasure. It seems that Gary wasn't all that concerned with making the actual numbers realistic, so long as there were solid numbers that you were supposed to track fastidiously.

Regarding the bulk rules, I think it is telling that the 2nd edition equivalent was basically (paraphrased) 'don't let your fighter carry a 10' cube of balsawood, just because it is in their weight limit, and maybe make something bulky like a rolled-up carpet of flying 'effectively weigh' twice as much or something. Again, realism wasn't as important as getting people to track their encumbrance (realistic or otherwise).

[Renduaz]

With all of the mentions of people ignoring portions of the game except in difficult areas, maybe that's how the game SHOULD have been. Rather than focusing on various subsystems, focus on one that requires additional hardship.

Like, for example, being in a Civilized area has no impact on your rations, weight, travel distance, or ammunition, no matter how much you fight. Wilderness areas impose some difficulty, especially if you stick around longer. Barren areas require tools or skills to ensure that you have enough resources for adventuring, and may require additional setup/safety to ensure a Long Rest without Exhaustion.


It might sound odd, but ask yourself when you consider things like Carrying Capacity, Rations, Ammunition, Exhaustion, Cold/Hot weather conditions, etc. all become relevant. Because, to me, they all seem to start becoming relevant at the same times.



His tweets are no longer errata. It's still "advice", as in, how he rules it, but it's not an official ruling (as in, an Adventure League ruling), until it shows up on the official Errata documentation. It's no longer a law, but an opinion that might become law. Some people value his opinion, others don't. As for me, I just consider it advice from someone with more experience. Advice doesn't mean they're right, but it means it's worth listening to.

Interesting, I just looked up the revocation of errata status. Technically though, I'm not sure if the change applies retroactively, since Crawford had the following (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1105277917582389248) to say about the change: "As of the January edition of the Sage Advice Compendium PDF, my tweets aren't official rulings. I don't want people having to sift through my tweets for official rules calls"

However, the tweet in question is from 2017, so it would've been errata up until the January edition, and if the change does not apply retroactively ( Which Jeremy's wording implies ), only being effective as of January 2019, then all past tweets would still be considered official rulings. But needless to say I have no idea whether the semantic of his tweet was intentional or not, and if the goal is for people not to have to sift through his tweets, then it might also make sense to annul all previous tweet, but I can't really tell if it's the case or not.

[Man_Over_Game]

Interesting, I just looked up the revocation of errata status. Technically though, I'm not sure if the change applies retroactively, since Crawford had the following (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1105277917582389248) to say about the change: "As of the January edition of the Sage Advice Compendium PDF, my tweets aren't official rulings. I don't want people having to sift through my tweets for official rules calls"

However, the tweet in question is from 2017, so it would've been errata up until the January edition, and if the change does not apply retroactively ( Which Jeremy's wording implies ), only being effective as of January 2019, then all past tweets would still be considered official rulings. But needless to say I have no idea whether the semantic of his tweet was intentional or not, and if the goal is for people not to have to sift through his tweets, then it might also make sense to annul all previous tweet, but I can't really tell if it's the case or not.

I'd say the safest bet is to assume that only the actual errata is official. If what he said was important enough to be a rule, 2+ years would be enough time for them to implement it into the official document. Plus, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have it be interpreted as "I don't want you to sift through my tweets for official rulings, unless it's an old ruling I made from a year or two ago".

[darknite]

From a lifetime of RPGing I can tell you that tracking ammo has a side effect of seeing how little ammo you use in most RPG combat, especially in a modern environment. Most battles I've played in Cyberpunk or Twilight 2000 or Feng Shui or 40k RPG are resolved in just a few seconds using a handful of rounds.

To me it really signifies the level of abstraction you get in RPG combat. On the one hand, many gun battles are resolved in a handful of seconds and few rounds. However in modern combat that is often more the exception rather than the rule as targets are often fleeting and shooters are often moving dynamically. So when you find you've mowed down 15 mooks before exhausting a Glock 17 magazine in an RPG, remember your game-ammo is about 10x more effective than real life.

[Tanarii]

Its the same thing as movies with infinite ammo vs those that don't.

Some people find infinite ammo hurts versimilitude, and/or finds the characters dealing with running out in a strategic or actical fashion enhances it.

Others just want to see **** get shot or blown up.

[darknite]

Its the same thing as movies with infinite ammo vs those that don't.

Some people find infinite ammo hurts versimilitude, and/or finds the characters dealing with running out in a strategic or actical fashion enhances it.

Others just want to see **** get shot or blown up.

Exactly. Heroes doing hero stuff is a common draw to RPGing.

[JeenLeen]

I'm generally in the game of "if it's so little gold it doesn't matter, and resupply is easy, no reason to track it" camp. Otherwise, it's annoying bookkeeping.

That said, if one wanted some fairness, I could see something like ruling that you need proficiency with tools to make/repair them. I don't recall the tool kits in 5e enough to try to map them to different gear, but I reckon one would make sense for a fletcher. In a 3.5e game I was in, I gave my character Craft (Arrows) or Profession (Fletcher) -- I forget which -- with a rank in it, and that seemed okay to the DM to say I made arrows as needed during downtime. For 5e, I could see ruling you have X (some reasonable and high number), and you can refresh them during a short or long rest (whatever seems appropriate to the playstyle at the table). Or just rule that you assume you have enough since you have the skill to make them yourself.


---

I realize it does make more sense to me to track throwing javelins, throwing daggers, throwing axes, and such, but I can't think of a good reason why. I guess the cost is why, but that dissolves in 5e after a few levels in. (At least, since the gold = magic items link is gone in default 5e, gold seems to lose a lot of importance after the first few levels.)

If I wanted to be consistent, I'd probably allow not having to track those items as well.

[Lunali]

As a player, I don't like tracking arrows because it's an extra step I have to do on every turn of combat and then again after combat when I try to recover some of them. Also, since I don't like worrying about them, I try to keep a large supply on hand, hundreds if I have extradimensional storage.

As a DM, I don't have people track arrows or rations most of the time, I just have them establish a number of each that they generally have on hand. If they get into a situation where getting more is significantly more difficult than normal, I'll have them track both until they can fix their supply issues.

Note, neither of the above applies to things like javelins that have a significant weight associated with them

[Snails]

Sometimes realism should shut up, go away, and let the fun commence. Technically one should track arrows, but it's the same minutiae detail as tracking rations. You want to play an adventurer not a bookkeeper. It should be enough for a player to say he restocks arrows when in a town for the courtesy to realism and get on with the game.

This. A thousand times this.

Arrows are almost always at a lesser risk of running out than food and other supplies. If your gaming group tracks your encumbrance down to the exact pound, so we know whether each PC is carrying two skins of water rather than three, and whether everyone has a nice bedroll so it is possible to get a Long Rest on uncomfortable rock, if this kind of thing makes your game more fun, then, yes, absolutely track arrows.

But most groups can only bother to track encumbrance down to the sword, shield, armor, they handwave the weight of the knotted rope, and the rest be damned.

Counting arrows is not fundamentally different from tracking blobs bat guano. And isn't it possible that the NPC wizard runs out on this day, too, because of dumb luck? I think you ought to roll on a chart for that, too, Mister DM.

If it is so fun, then the NPCs deserve to take part in the fun, too.

I do not see the archer as being especially worthy of this kind of negative attention, unless the DM explicitly tells the players: "For your trek into the wasteland, you know it may take months, so water, food, arrows, bat guano, write it ALL down, please, and tell me your total encumbrance and your encumbrance limits."

[Snails]

As a player, I don't like tracking arrows because it's an extra step I have to do on every turn of combat and then again after combat when I try to recover some of them. Also, since I don't like worrying about them, I try to keep a large supply on hand, hundreds if I have extradimensional storage.

If we want to be realistic, then an archer with fletchery skill is probably swimming in arrows, as he or she can use as is or repair most of the used arrows, presuming they win the battle, and can pick out additional arrows from the quivers of fallen foes.

But this kind of realism means bookkeeping during every battle, skill checks after every battle, and then more bookkeeping.

Does this sound fun?

[sithlordnergal]

I've only tracked ammo once, and that was in a homebrew survival campaign where we did not have resources readily available. That said, I do play AL, and technically you are allowed to buy mundane gear, including ammo, between sessions...so outside of that one time I could always replenish my stock of arrows. So outside of the few times we found +1 ammo, I never tracked it.

[DarkKnightJin]

.
If you want, give your party a resupply cost (say, 10gp) they can spend every time they visit a village or w/e. Make the cost a bit more than they would spend if they were tracking. Lazy players can just eat the cost, meticulous players get to save a bit of money.

I might use this for my campaign setting. It's gonna be based on a videogame-like setting anyway, so giving them the option from a 'menu' to turn on 'resupply' mode could work. Give them the explanation that it will impact their monetary rewards a little bit (maybe between 1 and 10gp per found stash of money, maybe a percentage) as compensation for the convenience.
In return, they don't have to keep track of their arrows and bolts, and I might be kind and give them 5-10 'charges' on their thrown weapons that reset on a short rest.

[Hytheter]

Our group doesn't even worry about copper or silver after late tier 2.

I'm shocked that anyone tracks silver and copper at all, let alone in late tier 2.

[Sindal]

I track my arrows, as a player, Just cause i'm strange like that.
I like the fleeting realism. It probably will stop mattering very soon, but for now, I like caring

It was quite jaring to be like "Oh wait...I'm firing more arrows per turn now...I need to buy more arrows"

As a DM, I trust that players are too and never really double check

[N810]

In our latest campaign session 0,
our DM was like, I give up tracking regular ammo,
I'm just going to assume you retrieve enough of them after the battle,
But I will be tracking any specialty ammunition.
So no more infinite exploding arrows. :/

[Pex]

In our latest campaign session 0,
our DM was like, I give up tracking regular ammo,
I'm just going to assume you retrieve enough of them after the battle,
But I will be tracking any specialty ammunition.
So no more infinite exploding arrows. :/

Certainly keep track of special, magical, or otherwise enhanced arrows.

[Tanarii]

I'm shocked that anyone tracks silver and copper at all, let alone in late tier 2.
Copper and Silver matters because of its weight, and the fact its all mixed in with gold and platinum and gems and probably art objects.

That means the players have a choice between hauling out a hundred pounds of useless weight, or taking hours in the dungeon to seperate it, or having a DM magic handwavium that it has been miraculously been sorted into penny and dime rolls by the monsters already.

[LibraryOgre]

Copper and Silver matters because of its weight, and the fact its all mixed in with gold and platinum and gems and probably art objects.

That means the players have a choice between hauling out a hundred pounds of useless weight, or taking hours in the dungeon to seperate it, or having a DM magic handwavium that it has been miraculously been sorted into penny and dime rolls by the monsters already.

This is why the discerning dungeoneer likes the portable hole over the bag of holding.

Hewards Handy Haversack could be interesting in this regard... fill it up, pull the coins out by type, sort of a slow autosort.

[Tanarii]

This is why the discerning dungeoneer likes the portable hole over the bag of holding.

Hewards Handy Haversack could be interesting in this regard... fill it up, pull the coins out by type, sort of a slow autosort.Yeah, but unfortunately the party is at the hands of fate, or at least the treasure hoard tables, when it comes to magic items. Hopefully.

But then again, tables that don't find encumberance and tracking logistics and dealing with hauling treasure away fun, probably dont find random magic items fun either. Which is just crazy, but hey more power to them at their own table.

Next people will be saying they don't have a designated party member for mapping either. /smh :)

[TyGuy]

Ah ranged martials

The expectation: I'm going to deal damage from a safe distance

The reality: I'm the only one who has to manage inventory for my attacks, **** is always on my balls giving me disadvantage or forcing disengage, and there's a chance I can run out of ammunition thus rendering my entire build useless until the DM allows me to resupply. Oh, and each attack costs 5 copper, sweet.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Ah ranged martials

The expectation: I'm going to deal damage from a safe distance

The reality: I'm the only one who has to manage inventory for my attacks, **** is always on my balls giving me disadvantage or forcing disengage, and there's a chance I can run out of ammunition thus rendering my entire build useless until the DM allows me to resupply. Oh, and each attack costs 5 copper, sweet.

I played a hunter in WoW vanilla (until they dropped ammo resupply costs). I feel your pain.

[Tanarii]

Ah ranged martials

The expectation: I'm going to deal damage from a safe distance

The reality: I'm the only one who has to manage inventory for my attacks, **** is always on my balls giving me disadvantage or forcing disengage, and there's a chance I can run out of ammunition thus rendering my entire build useless until the DM allows me to resupply. Oh, and each attack costs 5 copper, sweet.I don't think I've ever seen anyone claim that ranged Martials have it difficult before ... :smalltongue:

Btw you forgot "and my friends are always getting between me and the target, granting them half cover."

Of course most of that is negated by one feat or another.

Certainly used to be far more difficult as a ranged attacker. Especially when you had a coin flip of hitting your allies engaged in melee.

[CorporateSlave]

I actually do find it kind of fun to track my ammunition; and I'm always silently disappointed when the party does get a Bag of Holding and suddenly their is like "don't worry dude, we bought you 500 arrows." In those cases I try to make a point of tracking the 20 arrows/bolts my quiver holds, and actually have to use an Action to get at the new arrows...assuming the Bag of Holding is nearby! I also keep track of which arrows are among the 20 in the quiver (a couple silvered, a couple +1's, etc).

For me, it makes the combat more exciting for me somehow I guess, I get more of a feeling like every shot counts, and not just "hey rolling my dice again to see how much damage I've done." I don't make the DM do it for me or expect him to, but that's just because for me it is fun!

Note: No, I don't have OCD. I have CDO.

[Tectorman]

Btw you forgot "and my friends are always getting between me and the target, granting them half cover."

AFB, but I thought it was only enemies that could grant fellow enemies cover like that. I.e., when your allies are between you and your target, you're assumed to either know how to work with them or are outright telling them when to duck, and so the enemy doesn't get cover from you from your allies.

[JackPhoenix]

Interesting, I just looked up the revocation of errata status. Technically though, I'm not sure if the change applies retroactively, since Crawford had the following (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1105277917582389248) to say about the change: "As of the January edition of the Sage Advice Compendium PDF, my tweets aren't official rulings. I don't want people having to sift through my tweets for official rules calls"

However, the tweet in question is from 2017, so it would've been errata up until the January edition, and if the change does not apply retroactively ( Which Jeremy's wording implies ), only being effective as of January 2019, then all past tweets would still be considered official rulings. But needless to say I have no idea whether the semantic of his tweet was intentional or not, and if the goal is for people not to have to sift through his tweets, then it might also make sense to annul all previous tweet, but I can't really tell if it's the case or not.

It's not a "revocation of errata status", because SA tweets never were errata. They always were rulings, and they still are rulings even when compiled into Sage Advice Compendium.


AFB, but I thought it was only enemies that could grant fellow enemies cover like that. I.e., when your allies are between you and your target, you're assumed to either know how to work with them or are outright telling them when to duck, and so the enemy doesn't get cover from you from your allies.

You thought wrong. "A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend."

[Renduaz]

It's not a "revocation of errata status", because SA tweets never were errata. They always were rulings, and they still are rulings even when compiled into Sage Advice Compendium.



You thought wrong. "A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend."

The second, most upvoted answer (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97294/why-do-crawfords-tweets-seem-to-be-treated-on-par-with-the-actual-rules) argues as I would, that before the change, the tweets ( while not RAW per se ) were official clarifications, which is what Errata does, and were therefore considered on par with errata.

[JackPhoenix]

The second, most upvoted answer (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97294/why-do-crawfords-tweets-seem-to-be-treated-on-par-with-the-actual-rules) argues as I would, that before the change, the tweets ( while not RAW per se ) were official clarifications, which is what Errata does, and were therefore considered on par with errata.

No, errata are actual changes to what's written in the books. SA are rulings and clarifications. They are not the same thing, no matter what some random people on the internet think.

[Tanarii]

AFB, but I thought it was only enemies that could grant fellow enemies cover like that. I.e., when your allies are between you and your target, you're assumed to either know how to work with them or are outright telling them when to duck, and so the enemy doesn't get cover from you from your allies.Yeah, a lot of people aren't aware that allies block ranged attacks as half cover. Pits very commonly missed, since it's only mentioned one place almost in passing. But it's a pretty huge effect on back line archers and attack roll casters. (The latter primarily being cantrips.)


The second, most upvoted answer (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/97294/why-do-crawfords-tweets-seem-to-be-treated-on-par-with-the-actual-rules) argues as I would, that before the change, the tweets ( while not RAW per se ) were official clarifications, which is what Errata does, and were therefore considered on par with errata.RPG stack exchange generally isn't a good source of information.

Also RAW means the literal words in the book. Errata (and only errata) changes the words in the book, they are not "official clarifications", they are a change to the actual wording of a rule. Nothing is "on par" with errata in regards to RAW, only errata can actually change the words of the rule as written.

Anything other than a quote of the rule text, any interpretation of how to apply a rule, is not RAW. It's either an opinion on RAI or a ruling. Crawford just uses the Sage Advice compendium to compile his official opinions and rulings.

[CorporateSlave]

Sometimes realism should shut up, go away, and let the fun commence. Technically one should track arrows, but it's the same minutiae detail as tracking rations. You want to play an adventurer not a bookkeeper. It should be enough for a player to say he restocks arrows when in a town for the courtesy to realism and get on with the game.


Generally we do not do this (track rations), although if for some reason it keyed into the narrative it might actually become fun. Stranded in the wilderness or locked in a collapsed cave system, where survival becomes an issue - I feel like it can add some tension to a campaign and game where sometimes there is the threat of it being nothing more than rolling some d20's to figure out what happens next. I get that its not for everyone - people who grew up on power gaming and min-maxing will not enjoy this as much as people who prefer more heavily RP style campaigns I think. Same with arrows.

If pumping out Max DPR is what you like, then as you say tracking arrows makes little sense, and will not be much fun.

If giving yourself the feeling that every shot must count is enjoyable, tracking arrows may be a good option for you - but only if your DM understands this and is amenable. If you're the only one doing it and every encounter is being tweaked because of the other characters tip-toeing the OP line with optimizations, being the odd man out may just generate resentment that you aren't pulling your weight by maximizing DPR.

Personally, I like me a little campaign where you need to track (and scavenge/recover when possible) ammunition, and justify taking spells other than just combat optimized for damage-buffs-debuffs. Makes the world feel a little more real to me.

Then again, I've never played WoW. :smallwink:

[Tanarii]

I get that its not for everyone - people who grew up on power gaming and min-maxing will not enjoy this as much as people who prefer more heavily RP style campaigns I think. Same with arrows.
I find most people who want "RP" campaigns, which usually means something like talky-time and deep method acting, hate logistics tracking even more than power gamers and min-maxers. Because the people who enjoy logistics tracking are most commonly some variation of war gamers, people who like strategic and tactical gaming and using the rules that enable that. And the overlap between wargamers and power gamers is far more than the overlap between wargamers and "RP" enthusiasts.

[TyGuy]

Yeah, tedium avoidance isn't the same as power gaming.

[Asmotherion]

Is it fun?
in the same train of thought it's more fun to me to play with unlimited spell slots. That said game balance requires them to be limited.

Arrows not only allow you to fight from a safe distance and use cover; They also allow you to do more damage with specific builds than melee. And at a lesser cost of accuracy.

Buying arrows every so often (and using them up) is a balancing factor for this safer and yet at least as devastating fighting style (arguably more devastating).

Fun cannot go in the way of game balance.

[JNAProductions]

in the same train of thought it's more fun to me to play with unlimited spell slots. That said game balance requires them to be limited.

Arrows not only allow you to fight from a safe distance and use cover; They also allow you to do more damage with specific builds than melee. And at a lesser cost of accuracy.

Buying arrows every so often (and using them up) is a balancing factor for this safer and yet at least as devastating fighting style (arguably more devastating).

Fun cannot go in the way of game balance.

Um... The bolded is horribly wrong.

I like my games to be balanced, BECAUSE IT MAKES THEM MORE FUN. But I'd rather have a fun game that's horribly imbalanced than a perfectly balanced game that's boring.

As for tracking arrows... The most I'd do, in most circumstances, is just say "Alright, you're back in town. Mark off 2d4 (or some similar small amount) of gold, all of you, for supplies and maintenance." Now, in a desperate survival situation, I'd probably want arrows tracked, but usually I'm not running that.

[LibraryOgre]

And it's not like there is a single rubric of fun. For me, I like the low wealth, low power, chainmail-is-a-big-deal play of Hackmaster. You don't just track arrows, but you track whether the arrows were imbedded and how much damage they do getting removed. You can track how much food is being eaten. There are rules for dieting, if you want to get that gritty and crunchy. And that type of gaming has its place and its style.

For 5e? It depends on the game you want to run. Low levels, that kind of thing can be worthwhile. Mid levels, not so much. High levels, it might well be irrelevant. My coming campaign, I'm going to check the players at the first session, because it will be important there, but later, their resupply will be a lot less fraught... until the endgame. I'll be concerned about special items, but not so much food and arrows.

[qube]

The fun of arrow counting comes from the risk of running out. In most situations, that risk isnt high enough to matter (you're able to resupply often enough and carry enough that you wont realistically run out any time soon). not to mention ... what happens when you run out?

... oh, that's right, the archer player can now enjoy the fun of playing dead weight. Game Quality Improved


But, like Mark Hall & others pointed out "it's not like there is a single rubric of fun". Some people find it fun tha encounter has a serious chance of killing half the party. Others like the high fantasy hero powertrip style games. Same for resource management. I've DMed desert survival where the players had to track their food - I've DMed games where nobody ever ate (obviously they did, but nobody checked off rations, their waterskins were always full, etc...).

----

My advice: let the player decide - after all, it's his fun on the line.
- He likes trackign ammo? let 'm do it.
- He hates it? don't force it on 'm.

/easypeasylemonsquezy

[Sigreid]

not to mention ... what happens when you run out?

... oh, that's right, the archer player can now enjoy the fun of playing dead weight. Game Quality Improved


But, like Mark Hall & others pointed out "it's not like there is a single rubric of fun". Some people find it fun tha encounter has a serious chance of killing half the party. Others like the high fantasy hero powertrip style games. Same for resource management. I've DMed desert survival where the players had to track their food - I've DMed games where nobody ever ate (obviously they did, but nobody checked off rations, their waterskins were always full, etc...).

----

My advice: let the player decide - after all, it's his fun on the line.
- He likes trackign ammo? let 'm do it.
- He hates it? don't force it on 'm.

/easypeasylemonsquezy

So, just want to point out that just because an archer build is most effective when using archery doesn't mean he's not effective with other forms of combat. I mean, even an arcane archer is still a fighter capable of beating down most opponents with a sword or axe.

[Kyutaru]

So, just want to point out that just because an archer build is most effective when using archery doesn't mean he's not effective with other forms of combat. I mean, even an arcane archer is still a fighter capable of beating down most opponents with a sword or axe.

Plus this is a melee fighting system primarily where movement matters. Offering ranged tools is likely to have balance measures such as ammo or other restrictions. Magic works on a completely different system for its ranged spells. Generally if your army has ranged and melee units there is an advantage to being an archer that has to be reflected in the rules.

[Tanarii]

not to mention ... what happens when you run out?
You bust you your finesse weapon(s) are are still an effective melee combatant. This isn't AD&D.

[qube]

So, just want to point out that just because an archer build is most effective when using archery doesn't mean he's not effective with other forms of combat. I mean, even an arcane archer is still a fighter capable of beating down most opponents with a sword or axe.probbably a non-magic weapon, together with other equipment not spec'd to tank, together with a lack of feast, fighting style, etc ...

Sorry, but by this logic, we can just kick out the at-will cantrips, and revert back to the "good lod days" where low level wizards used light crossbows.

... funny how you don't see anyone arguing THAT was good design.

[Kyutaru]

probbably a non-magic weapon, together with other equipment not spec'd to tank, together with a lack of feast, fighting style, etc ...

Sorry, but by this logic, we can just kick out the at-will cantrips, and revert back to the "good lod days" where low level wizards used light crossbows.

... funny how you don't see anyone arguing THAT was good design.

Or using the Dexterity-style combat that was literally invented to accommodate this type of fighter. Gone are the days when your rogue is strictly an archer. Finesse fighting lets you be both a melee combatant and an archer at the cost of the usual Strength benefits. So just like mobas, we have Bodybuilders, Ninjas, and Geeks.

[LibraryOgre]

My advice: let the player decide - after all, it's his fun on the line.
- He likes trackign ammo? let 'm do it.
- He hates it? don't force it on 'm.

/easypeasylemonsquezy

On the other hand, I would not go this route... because the DM is a player, too, and THEIR fun matters just as much.

If you like ammo tracking and are planning on making it an issue, at least occasionally, tell the player beforehand.

If you don't like ammo tracking and the player is starting to stress about it? Let the player know.

If you're usually not that strict but may occasionally, for story reasons, force them to get more strict? Let them know that's how you play it.

But be clear with your expectations, so the laissez-faire player doesn't find themselves trying to be Legolas when the DM is running Naked and Afraid.

[CorporateSlave]

I find most people who want "RP" campaigns, which usually means something like talky-time and deep method acting, hate logistics tracking even more than power gamers and min-maxers. Because the people who enjoy logistics tracking are most commonly some variation of war gamers, people who like strategic and tactical gaming and using the rules that enable that. And the overlap between wargamers and power gamers is far more than the overlap between wargamers and "RP" enthusiasts.

I must concede our table may be outliers in this regard then - it is certainly the power gamer-y ones who dislike ammo tracking the most, for the specific reason of those times when it means they can't max-DPR due to running out or needing a reload or the like. The RP ones love to growl things like "Take him down fast, I've only got three shots left!"


Yeah, tedium avoidance isn't the same as power gaming.

Well, it's only tedium if you think it is tedium. For me, I find it actually kind of exciting, akin to watching a timer count down.

[Sigreid]

probbably a non-magic weapon, together with other equipment not spec'd to tank, together with a lack of feast, fighting style, etc ...

Sorry, but by this logic, we can just kick out the at-will cantrips, and revert back to the "good lod days" where low level wizards used light crossbows.

... funny how you don't see anyone arguing THAT was good design.

We apparently play very different games. My table expects people to be able to adapt and come up with alternate plans when necessary. That said, I don't go out of my way to deprive the archer of arrows, but it happens occasionally.

Also, attack cantrips are not an equal substitute for levelled spells, so yes, wizards and such go through this as well.

[TyGuy]

Well, it's only tedium if you think it is tedium. For me, I find it actually kind of exciting, akin to watching a timer count down.
And for the people who don't share your enthusiasm it is tedious and that doesn't make them power gamers or min/maxers.

[crayzz]

I must concede our table may be outliers in this regard then - it is certainly the power gamer-y ones who dislike ammo tracking the most, for the specific reason of those times when it means they can't max-DPR due to running out or needing a reload or the like. The RP ones love to growl things like "Take him down fast, I've only got three shots left!"



Well, it's only tedium if you think it is tedium. For me, I find it actually kind of exciting, akin to watching a timer count down.

Well, yeah, like I said: the fun comes from the risk of running out. If there's no real risk, there's no real fun, you're watching a timer that will never complete.

Mario levels have a timer on them: if you struggled with a level, the tail end of it was a mad dash to beat the clock. It was crazy fun sliding in under the wire with 6 seconds left. But the Mario timer handles itself discretely until it mattered. If the game regularly paused to make you count down the timer manually, it would be much less fun for most people. Tracking your arrows when you have 200+ is mostly just tedious, especially if you forget for a few rounds and need to stop and count from memory.

And that's all if you even find that fun in the first place. Some people just don't like logistics play.



probbably a non-magic weapon, together with other equipment not spec'd to tank, together with a lack of feast, fighting style, etc ...

Sorry, but by this logic, we can just kick out the at-will cantrips, and revert back to the "good lod days" where low level wizards used light crossbows.

... funny how you don't see anyone arguing THAT was good design.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. Being less effective isn't ideal, but it's a far cry from useless.

I'd agree it'd be a bad campaign design if the archer was put on a strict limit of arrows while everyone else was given free reign, but usually when logistics come into play, all of logistics come into play. If you're playing out a scenario where you're stuck behind enemy lines, the whole party is in trouble. Everyone needs rations, the wizard has limited spell components, potions are scarce, safe resting places are difficult to find, if you raid an enemy encampment you can only take what you can carry out by hand, etc, etc. It can be fun to be placed in a logistical nightmare like that.

The archer gets a pretty sweet deal on their ranged attacks, being able to threaten a wide swath of area at once, hit from behind cover, etc. The downside to that is a reliance on limited supplies. It's not bad design that the downside of a build comes up once in a while.

[JNAProductions]

Casters don't need components except expensive ones. They can use a focus in place of all non-expensive components.

[Pex]

And for the people who don't share your enthusiasm it is tedious and that doesn't make them power gamers or min/maxers.

Not that there's anything wrong with being a power gamer or min/maxer.

[tsotate]

Not only does tracking ammo disadvantage ranged players over melee, but it disadvantage specific types of ranged players more than others. Rogue sneak attack is designed to be on-par with extra attack classes like the fighter. Making players track ammo just pushes them toward archer rogues, who use only a quarter as many arrows as their fighter counterparts.

[JellyPooga]

This is my take on the subject.

1) Tracking ammo is in the rules.
2) I play by the rules and expect those I play with to as well.
3) Track your damn arrows.

Put it this way; D&D (as others have pointed out) is full of various minutiae to track; HP, gold, spell slots, etc. and you only track the things that are important to you. Non-EK Fighters don't track spell slots, but a Battlemaster will track his Superiority Dice, for example. He's taken the choice to play a Battlemaster and with that, the choice to track such things as required. If you've chosen to play a character that uses ammo, I (as a player and/or GM) will expect you've also made the choice to track ammo, just as if you'd chosen to play a Wizard or Battlemaster.

I'm not going to give a 20 Con Hill Dwarf Barbarian leeway on not tracking his HP "because he has so many it doesn't matter". I'm not going to assume the level 17 Wizard always has a low-level spell slot available, even though he has dozens and can recharge them on a short rest. I'm not going to assume a character always has a full waterskin, even if the party has a Cleric with Create/Destroy Water prepared. These are all part of the game we have signed up to play, so abide by the unspoken contract and play the game. If you don't like it, get someone to track it for you, use an app, a tally sheet or whatever, but if you really can't be dealing with this aspect of the game, then play a different character or play a different game.

And seriously; for all those saying it's unecessary and time-consuming bookeeping, it's as simple as having a tally sheet. 20 little lines on a page, in ink, that you can knock off in pencil and then erase when you get a chance to refilll that quiver. It's literally a fraction of a second during your turn. No more time "wasted" than any other part of your turn, unless your character uses no limited resources (spells, superiority dice, etc.).

[napoleon_in_rag]

Ranged combat has huge advantages over melee. Especially when you factor in cover. Unless you are playing in a featureless desert, you should be able to get half cover if not 3/4 cover on every encounter.

I don't see tracking the number of arrows as a hardship. It's no worse than hp.

[Tanarii]

I don't see tracking the number of arrows as a hardship. It's no worse than hp.
I keep seeing this argument, and as much as generally like the idea of logistics tracking, I don't think it holds much water. Remembering to change the value or pick up your pencil and make a tick mark once as part of every single attack is considerably more likely to be overlooked than updating hp after a damage die is rolled.

It's having the minor little thing that's part of a large thing, and in a slightly annoying way, that makes it a hardship. The fact it's a small little action but has to occur frequently makes the situation more annoying, not less.

Honestly the best solution I've seen from players of frequent archers is a pile of glass markers or counters from a game in front of them representing their quiver right next to their attack die, and right before they pick up the d20 they just slide one to a discard pile each time. Then slide half back into the quiver pile after combat. The pile reminds them they need to take the action in the first place.

[Kyutaru]

We simply use those Warhammer dice buckets full of D6s. The arrows deal d6 dmg and can be rolled alongside the attack. Once you run out of arrows from your quiver, you are out of arrows.

[Christian]

We simply use those Warhammer dice buckets full of D6s. The arrows deal d6 dmg and can be rolled alongside the attack. Once you run out of arrows from your quiver, you are out of arrows.

Whoa--that's brilliant. That's like Tanarii's solution, but totally folded into the attack resolution activity. It has the downside that you need to have enough dice on hand to represent your quiver, but most gamers have piles of dice available ...

[noob]

Whoa--that's brilliant. That's like Tanarii's solution, but totally folded into the attack resolution activity. It has the downside that you need to have enough dice on hand to represent your quiver, but most gamers have piles of dice available ...

so now for playing boltdwarf you need to buy a few thousand dice?

[Mellack]

Whoa--that's brilliant. That's like Tanarii's solution, but totally folded into the attack resolution activity. It has the downside that you need to have enough dice on hand to represent your quiver, but most gamers have piles of dice available ...

That is a great idea, but most archer focused characters I see use longbows. People tend to have a lot fewer d8's than d6's, and our archers tended to carry two quivers if they shoot a lot or have special arrows they want access to. I still like that though.

When it is easy to refill, such as having many more on a mount, cart, or extra-dimension, I don't see the reason to bother counting. The same as I wouldn't make someone mark off hit points if say a trap were going to do a d6 damage to a character on the way into their camp as they were about to take a long rest.

[JellyPooga]

Remembering to change the value or pick up your pencil and make a tick mark once as part of every single attack is considerably more likely to be overlooked than updating hp after a damage die is rolled.

I take issue with this assertion. My question is "why?". Why is it more likely that ammo is more likely to be overlooked than updating hp? I mean;

- I'd rather run out of ammo than hp, so that puts paid to any intentional oversight (aka: cheating...because let's not beat about the bush; not tracking ammo is as against the rules as not tracking your HP).

- It's not like you can forget that you're using ammo; you're actively using it. Constantly. Unlike the Wizard who forgets to knock off a spell slot when casting a spell after spamming cantrips all session, an archer or crossbowmans default action is literally "use ammo". Maybe the "infrequent archer" who only makes ranged attacks every now and then has an excuse to forget, but even then, the unusual act of choosing to go ranged instead of whatever they'd normally do, including whatever limiting circumstances enabled that decision, makes forgetting unlikely.

- The effort involved is typically less. HP boxes tend toward the small side of things on a character sheet; most I've seen force you to either write really small or erase and rewrite. Especially compared to, say, ammo trackers; usually an easy-to-use tally sheet of boxes or checks, usually in convenient quiver sized quantities and/or equipment sections. Erasing and rewriting numbers for HP is much more effort than ticking off a box or making a note in your kit. Yes, after the dust has cleared, there's some upkeep to do re: replenishing quivers, updating kit-lists, etc, but at least it's not happening in the middle of combat; you'll rarely hear someone saying "Give me a minute guys, I just need to check off my ammo", whilst "Hold on guys, my HP box just wore through...again" is a staple of most long campaigns I've played in.

[Chronos]

The fact that you're using ammo constantly is why it's more of a pain to track. My ranger very often goes for an entire battle, even one where some other party member is downed, without a scratch. When he takes any damage at all, it's notable, and there's a whole interaction devoted to the fact that he took damage. But he uses a couple of arrows nearly every single round of combat (basically, every round except when he's casting Spike Growth).

And yet, despite taking damage being so much rarer than using arrows, he's much more likely to be taken out of a fight by damage than by running out of arrows. And if I feel that the chance of running out of arrows is still too high, I can just buy double or triple the amount. I can't just double or triple my HP.

Tracking arrows is both more work and makes less difference than tracking HP.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Tracking arrows is both more work and makes less difference than tracking HP.

Amen. It also pushes people to dipping Warlock 2 for EB spam. Because it's arrows, just no ammo.

[Willie the Duck]

I take issue with this assertion. My question is "why?". Why is it more likely that ammo is more likely to be overlooked than updating hp? I mean;

Look, we're at the chicken and egg point here. The "why" is because something is interesting and it is interesting because the DM and gaming group make it interesting. Re-imaging the game such that tracking hit points isn't interesting (at least in a combat-centric game) requires active effort. On the other hand, making tracking arrows interesting takes active work.


- I'd rather run out of ammo than hp, so that puts paid to any intentional oversight (aka: cheating...because let's not beat about the bush; not tracking ammo is as against the rules as not tracking your HP).

Let's not beat around the bush--no one else is talking about cheating. Mind you, we could be, I suppose. But I'm pretty sure everyone else is talking about not tracking ammo as part of house rules/table culture/collective agreement/whatever you want to call it. If player A thinks this is a 'just throw money at the weapon shop every time we visit town'-type of game, player B thinks it is a 'don't worry about it at all'-type game, player C things it is a 'track ammo religiously'-type game, and the DM thinks one or none of these players is correct, then that is a communication issue.


- The effort involved is typically less. HP boxes tend toward the small side of things on a character sheet; most I've seen force you to either write really small or erase and rewrite. Especially compared to, say, ammo trackers; usually an easy-to-use tally sheet of boxes or checks, usually in convenient quiver sized quantities and/or equipment sections. Erasing and rewriting numbers for HP is much more effort than ticking off a box or making a note in your kit. Yes, after the dust has cleared, there's some upkeep to do re: replenishing quivers, updating kit-lists, etc, but at least it's not happening in the middle of combat; you'll rarely hear someone saying "Give me a minute guys, I just need to check off my ammo", whilst "Hold on guys, my HP box just wore through...again" is a staple of most long campaigns I've played in.

For both HP and ammo (when we've tracked it) we've always used the small-sized sticky-notes for such things. HP boxes or the tiny little ammo boxes pre-made character sheets tend to have just always end up becoming grey-black smears, regardless of what time of pencil and eraser you use.

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: I would remind people that someone prefering a different playstyle is not an attack on you, nor an example of badwrongfun.

[CorporateSlave]

I suppose I find that keeping a little 20: written on my character sheet that I make a couple of tick marks next to every time I fire off a couple shots just somehow doesn't feel like any trouble to me, much less game crushing tedium and bother. (And I've gotta say, I am really liking the idea of a dice cup "quiver" with arrows or bolts as d6 or d8, with perhaps different colors for the silvered, magic, etc arrows! It's easy enough to buy a few spare d8 on eBay or wherever nowadays. But then again, I like keeping track.)

I've also been in campaigns with PC's using guns, and while the DM didn't much bother enforcing arrows and bolts, he was BIG on enforcing reloading those things. So to me it seemed only fair I keep track as well, and in the end found it easy and ultimately adding an enjoyable element of tension to the game.

One thing I like about 5e is the limits placed on equipment, like 3 attunement slots. I feel like ammunition fits in here as well. I know 5e is a game of home-brew, but I suspect that some things such as ammunition and encumbrance are factored into the game balance (after all, there are an awful lot of magic items that are essentially meaningless unless you're using those rules). You have 200+ arrows in your Bag Of Holding? Well after 20 shots that will be an Action to refill your quiver. Unless of course you've a Quiver of Elhona, then its 60. No Bag Of Holding? Drop your pack to stay mobile a fight...hope that sneaky goblin doesn't snatch it and run off! But if you're player's fun is limited to the dice rolling of the hack and slash they're optimized for (and why shouldn't it be, as was said nothing wrong with being a power gamer) they probably won't like it.

EDIT: One other thing, as far as "why they matter" 200+ standard arrows might seem tedious to track, but a quiver holds 20, and as a DM I would absolutely make players track if what they actually have is:
200 mundane arrows
40 Arrows +1
40 Silvered Arrows
20 Arrows of Giant Slaying
10 Arrows of Dragon Slaying
10 Unbreakable Arrows
20 Arrows +2
5 Arrows +3
10 Arrows they just coated with Oil of Sharpness
5 Arrows they just coated with Poison

I would want to know which are the 20 they have in their quiver at the moment, and which are buried in a Bag of Holding.

[zinycor]

Except you're only allowed to wear a single quiver at a time. Reloading would constitute digging through your oversized knapsack for yet another one. With how higher level arrow feats in past editions encouraged arrow spam and how 2nd edition had you firing up to 10 shots per round with buffs, running out was a real concern.


Even if that were true, (And I don't remember any rules saying that you can only have one quiver ready) it would very unlikely for a quiver to get emptied in the middle of a combat

[PhoenixPhyre]

Even if that were true, (And I don't remember any rules saying that you can only have one quiver ready) it would very unlikely for a quiver to get emptied in the middle of a combat

Rangers and volley. Or a fighter who action surges. Both will drain quivers real fast. Or drawn-out fights.

[stoutstien]

Not only does tracking ammo disadvantage ranged players over melee, but it disadvantage specific types of ranged players more than others. Rogue sneak attack is designed to be on-par with extra attack classes like the fighter. Making players track ammo just pushes them toward archer rogues, who use only a quarter as many arrows as their fighter counterparts.

This may be the first time anyone has made the argument that ranged focused characters are in anyway at a disadvantage to melee.

It's not hard to have each party member carry extra quivers if you are worried about running out. What's a pound in the end.

Also removing tracking arrows removes the ablity to award players with magic items like the quiver of ehlonna or other magic items that can be a boon for archers/ weapon throwing characters.

[zinycor]

probbably a non-magic weapon, together with other equipment not spec'd to tank, together with a lack of feast, fighting style, etc ...

Sorry, but by this logic, we can just kick out the at-will cantrips, and revert back to the "good lod days" where low level wizards used light crossbows.

... funny how you don't see anyone arguing THAT was good design.

You haven't seen anyone arguing that? I see it constantly, and I don't think it would be too bad.

[TheSchleus]

Honestly I think this is the same as tracking any other kind of logistics. Either your supplies are limited and it matters, or they aren't and they don't. And both are fun in their own way, it just comes down to a question of what kind of game you're playing. Making the archer track his arrows while no other logistics are tracked seems silly, but it's not like having limited arrows is some terrible thing that makes archers bad. A 5e archer is weaker in melee but the way the game is set up they should be fine and even be pretty decent off-tanks, and there are advantages to being ranged so if sometimes you're weaker that's okay. (I'm also noticing a few people seem to not see archers as having much advantage over melee and I'm wondering if that's a game type thing as well. If enemies are easily able to attack your archer and you aren't fighting enemies it's hard to get into melee with and things like that, maybe being ranged doesn't really have an advantage.)

[Kyutaru]

Some logistics measures have been incorporated into magic already. Food and water can be summoned. Some chores can be prestidigitation handled. Unseen Servant is a ritual. Mage hand replaces many functions of the 10-foot pole without needing to figure out where it is at all times.

Arrows on the other hand have no such spell. Keep tracking arrows.

[Mellack]

Some logistics measures have been incorporated into magic already. Food and water can be summoned. Some chores can be prestidigitation handled. Unseen Servant is a ritual. Mage hand replaces many functions of the 10-foot pole without needing to figure out where it is at all times.

Arrows on the other hand have no such spell. Keep tracking arrows.

Unless you literally lose the arrow, (wounded creature gets away, lands in swift river, etc) I would argue that mending should fix any of your arrows used.

[Kyutaru]

Unless you literally lose the arrow, (wounded creature gets away, lands in swift river, etc) I would argue that mending should fix any of your arrows used.

Arrows being retrievable most of the time with a chance of breaking on impact is something as old as 2nd edition. Monster corpses in old computer games would even have some of the arrows you used still on them. But by the mending logic, you can spend time each day to create an infinite number of arrows by breaking them in half and repairing each half.

[Willie the Duck]

Arrows being retrievable most of the time with a chance of breaking on impact is something as old as 2nd edition. Monster corpses in old computer games would even have some of the arrows you used still on them. But by the mending logic, you can spend time each day to create an infinite number of arrows by breaking them in half and repairing each half.

For reference:


At the end of the battle, you can recover half your expended ammunition by taking a minute to search the battlefield.


Mending [/I]spell]This spell repairs a single break or tear in an object you touch, such as broken chain link, two halves of a broken key, a torn clack, or a leaking wineskin. As long as the break or tear is no larger than 1 foot in any dimension, you mend it, leaving no trace of the former damage.

Technically speaking, the Mending spell would not do that (it breaks a repair, not makes a whole arrow out of a half of one), OTOH, it's also not specified that the arrows not recovered are such because they are broken. I think we're well into DM-interpretation land.

[Vogie]

Even if that were true, (And I don't remember any rules saying that you can only have one quiver ready) it would very unlikely for a quiver to get emptied in the middle of a combat

If you always start at 20. It's common to fire 3-5 shots/turn for any of the ranged classes, between extra attack and Crossbow expert's bonus action hand crossbow attack. Fighters have action surge & extra attack multipliers alongside various subclass features; Hunter Rangers have the Horde breaker & Volley features.

A level 15 Samurai with a Hand crossbow can take 5 attacks each turn without breaking a sweat, due to crossbow expert and Rapid Strike, for a total of 8 arrows fired in 6 seconds if they use action surge, and jumping to 10 arrows a turn at level 20.

A Volley from an 11th level hunter ranger can hit potentially 16 targets - provided they're all in a 20ft cube ("any number of creatures within 10 feet of a point you can see within your weapon’s range"), as a pair of 5 ft squares in all directions from a point. If they have Horde Breaker, and there's a target within 5 ft of a hit target that isn't in that zone... that grows it to 17 targets


1
2
3
4


5
6
7
8


9
10
11
12


13
14
15
16



And there's a discussion of the wording on Swift Quiver to contend with. RAW wording makes it sound like it's only providing free ammo for the 2 bonus action attacks, while others think it gives essentially free ammo for the duration.

[Misterwhisper]

I solved this problem by just making a cheap magic item.

Ring of arrows 50g

Whenever you pull back a bow while wearing this ring on your drawing hand, an arrow appears nocked in place. This arrow disappears at the end of the round.

If every caster can just go, oh I have a focus for this or a pouch so I just ignore components, 50g for infinite basic arrows is fine

[Pex]

In the Avengers movies Hawkeye ran out of arrows once. It was a funny moment for the audience. It never happened nor spoken as a possibility to happen again. That's how it's like in the game. For that one encounter you run out of arrows uh oh what do you do now, it's tension but a fun tension of play. As the archer player you might even laugh at the situation yourself. As a repeated thing it's frustration.

[Kyutaru]

In the Avengers movies Hawkeye ran out of arrows once. It was a funny moment for the audience. It never happened nor spoken as a possibility to happen again. That's how it's like in the game. For that one encounter you run out of arrows uh oh what do you do now, it's tension but a fun tension of play. As the archer player you might even laugh at the situation yourself. As a repeated thing it's frustration.

I guess Hawkeye is smart enough not to make the same mistake twice.

[Snails]

As someone who has literally tracked the weight of every item on my PC down to the last copper penny, it is not that I am unwilling to track something like arrows.

I do strongly believe that (1) this kind of detail does not make the game more fun for most players, (2) the problem is trivially solvable for >99.9% of combats that are likely to be seen at the gaming table, so adding this level of detail is just slowing the game down.

"Oh, DM, I salvage my arrows. Should I roll for how many are broken or will you?"
"Oh, DM, I pick up arrows from my fallen foes. How many exactly?"
"Oh, DM, I top off my quiver from arrows the dwarf is carrying for me."
"Oh, DM, I carry two quivers. Doesn't say anything about the number of quivers I can carry, right?"
"Oh, DM, my wizard friend helps repair some broken arrows with Mending. How many does he repair?"
"Oh, DM, I sit around the camp fire, and repair arrows. How does fletchery work in this game, again?"
"Oh, DM, is anyone in this bandit camp selling arrows?"
"Oh, DM, do crabman arrows work with my bow?"
"Oh, DM, can the ranger scout for a ready source of straight sticks for shafts?"
"Oh, DM, which part of the arrow is broken? The head, the shaft, or the feathering? Because I have some supplies for some of these."

Does this kind of interaction every in game day, after every combat make for a more fun game?

[Snails]

In the Avengers movies Hawkeye ran out of arrows once. It was a funny moment for the audience. It never happened nor spoken as a possibility to happen again. That's how it's like in the game. For that one encounter you run out of arrows uh oh what do you do now, it's tension but a fun tension of play. As the archer player you might even laugh at the situation yourself. As a repeated thing it's frustration.

This kind of reasoning applies equally well to blobs of bat guano. Maybe the PC wizards runs out? Maybe the NPC wizard runs out? Seeing the BBEG reach for the spell pouch and say "Uh Oh" could be a wonderful dramatic moment.

As I said elsewhere, as a player I do not have a whit of a problem with tracking this stuff myself. But I do believe as a matter of gaming philosophy, that a DM that believes that things like arrow tracking make the game better should follow through and act as if it were true.

[CorporateSlave]

But I do believe as a matter of gaming philosophy, that a DM that believes that things like arrow tracking make the game better should follow through and act as if it were true.

Not 100% sure what you mean by this, but our DM does also track NPC enemy ammunition, and it sure can be a relief when they run out of javelins/arrows/whatever after a few rounds of peppering the hell out of everyone in the party...or when we have a round to bum rush a guy while he reloads...and the PC's are pretty good at enforcing each others' ammo (especially the guy with a firearm that makes it into every other campaign).

While your extensive list of arrow repair/recovery/salvage questions might be rather cumbersome, about a third of them are already governed by a simple game mechanic rule (1 minute scavenging reverse 1/2 expended ammunition), and about another third can be covered by crafting rules, which means around 2/3 are essentially non-issues because they can be addressed by the PC's themselves assuming they follow the honor system. I mean, you can pester a DM with anything and slow the game down. Personally the few that remain (enemy creature arrow compatibility and the ability to purchase more while away from civilization) are actually potentially interesting/fun, and have a quick yes/no answer anyway.

On the other hand, the list I proposed a few posts back which increases in relevance as levels progress regarding the various types of special/magical arrows is pretty important - knowing which you have immediately on hand, and which you will need to retrieve (don't want to waste those last three +2 arrows? Then spend a round restocking the quiver). A lot of the arguments posted really only apply to mass amounts of mundane ammunition. Tracking magical or special arrows should be a must the same as spell slots if you ask me.

[Pex]

This kind of reasoning applies equally well to blobs of bat guano. Maybe the PC wizards runs out? Maybe the NPC wizard runs out? Seeing the BBEG reach for the spell pouch and say "Uh Oh" could be a wonderful dramatic moment.

As I said elsewhere, as a player I do not have a whit of a problem with tracking this stuff myself. But I do believe as a matter of gaming philosophy, that a DM that believes that things like arrow tracking make the game better should follow through and act as if it were true.

The designers acceded to the reality of playing in that regard by having a spell focus and even then material components are not used up unless the spell specifically says so. Such spells are usually the more potent ones with expensive materials components such that this limitation is is part of the point of the spell. It's perfectly fine for one adventure the wizard has lost his spell components and focus. Oh know, what are you going to do? To have it happen repeatedly is frustration. Same thing for a melee warrior and his weapon, any character and the equipment he needs.

[JellyPooga]

The fact that you're using ammo constantly is why it's more of a pain to track. My ranger very often goes for an entire battle, even one where some other party member is downed, without a scratch. When he takes any damage at all, it's notable, and there's a whole interaction devoted to the fact that he took damage. But he uses a couple of arrows nearly every single round of combat (basically, every round except when he's casting Spike Growth).

And yet, despite taking damage being so much rarer than using arrows, he's much more likely to be taken out of a fight by damage than by running out of arrows. And if I feel that the chance of running out of arrows is still too high, I can just buy double or triple the amount. I can't just double or triple my HP.

Tracking arrows is both more work and makes less difference than tracking HP.

I'm sorry if I come across trite, but this argument sounds like complaining about having to actually pick up dice to roll them, to me. If you want you make omelette, you gotta break eggs. You want to play an archer, you gotta spend arrows. You want to roll dice, you gotta pick them up first. Can't do one without the other, you know?

Besides, as others have alluded to, part of the fun (for me at least) of playing as an archer style character isn't packing hundreds of mundane arrows so that I don't have to worry about running out; it's about packing/collecting as many different types of arrows, maybe even unique ones, that I then need to pick and choose between depending on the situation. If the game is so dull at even the low-mid game that I'm still spamming mundane arrows, I'm probably not that intrested in playing that game at all, let alone worried about how tedious arrow-tracking may or may not be.


Look, we're at the chicken and egg point here. The "why" is because something is interesting and it is interesting because the DM and gaming group make it interesting. Re-imaging the game such that tracking hit points isn't interesting (at least in a combat-centric game) requires active effort. On the other hand, making tracking arrows interesting takes active work.

As I say above, tracking arrows is interesting if you're tracking more than just mundane arrows. Magical arrows are right there in the DMG and as a "consumable" should rightly be relatively common loot, much like potions and scrolls. That's the default. Packing hundreds of the same kind of arrows makes tracking them tedious by taking away the decision of a) whether or not you can afford or need to use your bow in the first place, b) what arrows to use in this scenario. Choices are what make things interesting, not arbitrary numbers going up and down.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm sorry if I come across trite, but this argument sounds like complaining about having to actually pick up dice to roll them, to me. If you want you make omelette, you gotta break eggs. You want to play an archer, you gotta spend arrows. You want to roll dice, you gotta pick them up first. Can't do one without the other, you know?.

Well, it seems we've established that you can. You actually have to pick up dice to roll them, you don't have to track arrows to play an archer.

Beyond that, it's not clear to me whether or not having to track arrows/the risk of running out was intended by the designers to be a counter-argument for/opportunity cost of playing an archer character. If that were the case, I don't think it has worked very well. Someone around here has a stock phrase about balancing something by making it annoying is a bad game design mechanic, and in this case I am inclined to agree.


Besides, as others have alluded to, part of the fun (for me at least) of playing as an archer style character isn't packing hundreds of mundane arrows so that I don't have to worry about running out; it's about packing/collecting as many different types of arrows, maybe even unique ones, that I then need to pick and choose between depending on the situation. If the game is so dull at even the low-mid game that I'm still spamming mundane arrows, I'm probably not that intrested in playing that game at all, let alone worried about how tedious arrow-tracking may or may not be.

I think this is where arrow tracking can be fun, and I think that's the point that myself and others have been making. Tracking arrows usually is just a chore, right up until you get lots of different choices in your arrow use. Then it becomes a bunch of levers and knobs and buttons you get to pull at the right moment to affect the outcomes. So I think this is a case of violently agreeing/starting on opposite sides but then arriving at the same point.


As I say above, tracking arrows is interesting if you're tracking more than just mundane arrows. Magical arrows are right there in the DMG and as a "consumable" should rightly be relatively common loot, much like potions and scrolls. That's the default. Packing hundreds of the same kind of arrows makes tracking them tedious by taking away the decision of a) whether or not you can afford or need to use your bow in the first place, b) what arrows to use in this scenario. Choices are what make things interesting, not arbitrary numbers going up and down.

Then I am not sure we're disagreeing. Choices are what makes things interesting, and those groups who choose to make the tracking of arrows probably already are, have (admittedly, pretty un-granular) rules in the books to allow them to do so.

Personally, I would relish the (occasional, as a side game) opportunity to go all-in on the survivalist hexcrawling game. Not just track arrows, but rations -- and I don't mean just how many days worth, because that's still often tracked. I mean tracking what types of food your characters are carrying, how you might prepare it (thus, do you have the cooking pot to turn the oats into porridge), and when each might go bad. When the party comes to a river, they need to figure out what will get damaged by water, what is in an oiled canvas bag, what they will have to carry over their head, etc. When it comes time to repair the arrows, you have to figure out how to melt the pitch you are intending to use to reattach the arrow heads, and so forth. Lowering the scale of the adventure and making successfully completing the journey to the dungeon being a success in and of itself sounds like fun. Mind you, it's been a long time, and I might just be having backwards-facing rose tinted glasses, but there is a certain appeal.

[ProsecutorGodot]

In an SKT campaign I was in, our Ranger player was meticulous about tracking ammo. We were on a bit of a time crunch at one of the points where they ran out and it would have been pretty rough to go and buy more.

Fortunately my character was in possession of Marvelous Pigments. Not only did the Ranger never actually run out of arrows but I also personalized the arrows with their name engraved into each one.

Ammo tracking is what you do with your 20 starter pieces of ammunition before you're able to afford a few sets of quivers. At that point you're not usually going to be at risk of running out. Talk with your DM about the campaign expectations and if you're going to be playing in a game that will leave you with a lot of dangerous travelling between cities, that would the the type of adventure where I would encourage the players to track their ammo.

An extra quiver of arrows isn't all that expensive and it's not as if you've got much else to spend your gold on. You could even pay your party members to each carry a quiver for you (assuming they wouldn't volunteer to do so as your companion) if you're worried about the encumbrance angle. Once you can afford to buy them in bulk, that's more or less an invitation to spend X amount of gold on them and never counting them again, X being whatever amount your DM chooses as a reasonable stockpile.

[Chronos]

Oh, I do track special ammunition (which mostly means silver). It is, after all, special. But I'm also not usually using special ammo.

[TheSchleus]

The designers acceded to the reality of playing in that regard by having a spell focus and even then material components are not used up unless the spell specifically says so. Such spells are usually the more potent ones with expensive materials components such that this limitation is is part of the point of the spell. It's perfectly fine for one adventure the wizard has lost his spell components and focus. Oh know, what are you going to do? To have it happen repeatedly is frustration. Same thing for a melee warrior and his weapon, any character and the equipment he needs.

This I agree with. Whether you're tracking your arrows or not, actually running out should be a rare occurrence, just like any other major character inhibiting situation. (Unless your character is specifically supposed to be a switch hitter melee/ranged type, and you carry fewer arrows for that reason, or something like that, I guess.) If you're in a situation where you're tracking everything and all resources are limited and important, it might be different, but those aren't the normal game as far as I can tell.

I've never actually had a game where magic or otherwise unique arrows have been a common occurrence (although we really should be carrying around silvered arrows as a matter of course, I'm not sure why my group doesn't do that) but I agree that tracking ammo would be far more interesting when it's specialized arrows with different effects. Of course that means you need enough special ammo for it to show up but not enough for it to be effectively unlimited. My group just never gets special ammo, because apparently our DMs don't think about it.

[Snails]

The designers acceded to the reality of playing in that regard by having a spell focus and even then material components are not used up unless the spell specifically says so. Such spells are usually the more potent ones with expensive materials components such that this limitation is is part of the point of the spell. It's perfectly fine for one adventure the wizard has lost his spell components and focus. Oh know, what are you going to do? To have it happen repeatedly is frustration. Same thing for a melee warrior and his weapon, any character and the equipment he needs.

In case my point was insufficiently clear (but I think you get)...

IMNSHO from a gamist and a simulationist and a narrativist perspective, I do see any rational argument that arrows need to be tracked any more carefully than every kind of spell component including those components that are not expensive.

Running out of anything is going to very very rare for both archers and spellcasters that take simple precautions.

Yes, it is more than fine for a particular PC to run into a rare situation where they have to cope without their main schtick, for some weird reason. That is an interesting challenge. To have it happen repeatedly would be an unnecessary frustration that will make the game less fun, because the character applying trivial character knowledge would be able to figure out means to prevent it from happening again (or at least make it very unlikely to reoccur).

Obviously there are rare situations where the archer will tear through two or three score arrows in a single combat, depleting the multiple quivers he is carrying. Are those situations actually more common than combats a sorcerer might cast eight or twelve Fireballs and come up short for components? And do we really believe in those situations we need to track the in combat resupply from, say, the stocky dwarf who can be the beast of burden for the team? "Here! Take my quiver."

If the Party is trekking for months into the Desolation Desert where re-supply may be impossible, yes, I would argue for tracking arrows. But not just arrows. Lots of things could potentially run out and force the Party to make on the fly tactical adjustments.

The fact the designers acceded to gaming reality in one situation but not another is not a counterargument -- that is my underlying point.

[Snails]

My group just never gets special ammo, because apparently our DMs don't think about it.

Magic arrows became a bit of a joke because in 3e it probably made sense to just sell them for whatever pocket change they could offer.

Most common situations where they actually mattered was when there was a very limited supply, and those, say, four +1 arrows were the only means for a particular PC to punch through the monster's DR.

Notice that a scroll of Magic Weapon, for the cost of loose change, pretty much solves this problem, albeit imperfectly, and even very low level parties can well afford that measure, given the 3e Wizard could create scrolls.

So it is possible your DM did not think about it precisely because he or she did not see that it created an interesting situation that justified the paperwork.

[Pex]

I'm sorry if I come across trite, but this argument sounds like complaining about having to actually pick up dice to roll them, to me. If you want you make omelette, you gotta break eggs. You want to play an archer, you gotta spend arrows. You want to roll dice, you gotta pick them up first. Can't do one without the other, you know?

Besides, as others have alluded to, part of the fun (for me at least) of playing as an archer style character isn't packing hundreds of mundane arrows so that I don't have to worry about running out; it's about packing/collecting as many different types of arrows, maybe even unique ones, that I then need to pick and choose between depending on the situation. If the game is so dull at even the low-mid game that I'm still spamming mundane arrows, I'm probably not that intrested in playing that game at all, let alone worried about how tedious arrow-tracking may or may not be.



As I say above, tracking arrows is interesting if you're tracking more than just mundane arrows. Magical arrows are right there in the DMG and as a "consumable" should rightly be relatively common loot, much like potions and scrolls. That's the default. Packing hundreds of the same kind of arrows makes tracking them tedious by taking away the decision of a) whether or not you can afford or need to use your bow in the first place, b) what arrows to use in this scenario. Choices are what make things interesting, not arbitrary numbers going up and down.

Here is where we can agree. The arrows being magical makes the difference. You can't just restock them when you reach town or make your own. These then are considered magic items, and once something is labeled a magic item its importance is elevated to players they want to keep track of them. Players certainly don't complain about having to keep track of their potions and scrolls. However, how common or often a player gets his magic arrows is DM dependent. You can't presume the player gets to restock his supply in common enough intervals to maintain interest of bookkeeping his magic arrow collection.

However, we're agreeing on the principle. Magic items are not minutiae. They're special, so it's interesting to keep track of them. Regular arrows are minutiae. It's boring to keep tabs on them. Restock in town and don't worry about it.

[Tanarii]

The ability to attack from 5 to 80/150 feet away (or more with a penalty or feat), firing into melee with little to no penalryz while effectively defending yourself if someone happens to close and attack you in melee, and switch to being an effective melee range combatant ... is already magic item level special.

Edit: kids these days have it so easy, they don't even have to fire their bow uphill both ways to D&D school /grognard

[Kyutaru]

Edit: kids these days have it so easy, they don't even have to fire their bow uphill both ways to D&D school /grognard
Young whippersnappers would have found the old days a mixed bag. Not only do you have that +5 longbow but it stacks with your +5 arrows. Archers are snipers that handle tough things but still do garbage damage without a composite bow, and it gets worse when 90% of the monsters have some immunity to normal weapons (bow doesn't count, has to be magic arrows). Then there's all the enemies immune to piercing damage. But hey at least you can fire 10 arrows at a time with the right buffs that don't degrade attack bonuses. Now you just have to contend with thrown darts being superior to you in close distances because thrown weapons are just that good and darts are insanely fast attack speed.

[LibraryOgre]

Young whippersnappers would have found the old days a mixed bag. Not only do you have that +5 longbow but it stacks with your +5 arrows. Archers are snipers that handle tough things but still do garbage damage without a composite bow, and it gets worse when 90% of the monsters have some immunity to normal weapons (bow doesn't count, has to be magic arrows). Then there's all the enemies immune to piercing damage. But hey at least you can fire 10 arrows at a time with the right buffs that don't degrade attack bonuses. Now you just have to contend with thrown darts being superior to you in close distances because thrown weapons are just that good and darts are insanely fast attack speed.

Or the glory that was a girdle of giant strength, a strength bow, and the double magic.

[Willie the Duck]

Or the glory that was a girdle of giant strength, a strength bow, and the double magic.

Add to that that, if you have the girdle, you could (assuming you were using an arrange-to-taste attribute rolling method) have a high Dex (maybe even 19 if you were an elf), and add that +5 to AC on top of plate mail:smallbiggrin:.

[Kyutaru]

Add to that that, if you have the girdle, you could (assuming you were using an arrange-to-taste attribute rolling method) have a high Dex (maybe even 19 if you were an elf), and add that +5 to AC on top of plate mail:smallbiggrin:.

Yeah, true archers dumped strength in 2nd edition and rolled around with magic heavy armor with stacking to-hit bonuses and no worsening base attack chance for multiple attacks.

Glorious times. OP as heck but glorious times.

[LibraryOgre]

Yeah, true archers dumped strength in 2nd edition and rolled around with magic heavy armor with stacking to-hit bonuses and no worsening base attack chance for multiple attacks.

Glorious times. OP as heck but glorious times.

Until someone got close enough to feed you a sword.

[Tanarii]

Young whippersnappers would have found the old days a mixed bag. Not only do you have that +5 longbow but it stacks with your +5 arrows.I recall +3 being the best bonus you could get on a weapon, outside of swords & master-level BeCMi. But I have some weird holes in my memory so you could be right.

But yeah, it was a mixed bag of good and bad.


thrown darts being superior to you in close distances because thrown weapons are just that good and darts are insanely fast attack speed.hahahaha.

I got lucky most of my AD&D experience didn't include UA. Although BECMi version of weapon specialization was also a ludicrous (and in that edition much needed) power boost for Fighters.


Until someone got close enough to feed you a sword.
Reminds me of that one scene with Raistlin ...

[Snails]

The ability to attack from 5 to 80/150 feet away (or more with a penalty or feat), firing into melee with little to no penalryz while effectively defending yourself if someone happens to close and attack you in melee, and switch to being an effective melee range combatant ... is already magic item level special.

Then obviously you believe that spellcasters should track all their spell components.

[Tanarii]

Then obviously you believe that spellcasters should track all their spell components.
And cantrips shouldn't exist as unlimited at-wills. And getting hit should interrupt a spell being cast.

Clearly you didn't understand how /grognard I was being. :smallamused:

[GreyBlack]

Ah, the problem of the Tyranny of Fun. On one hand, you want to follow the rules and on the other hand it seems like everything is soooooo.... unnecessary.

I don't generally track my players ammunition. Funnily enough, I generally don't care about ammo but my players prefer to. As such, I leave it to my players; if they want to track ammunition, I let them and if they don't, I don't.

[Chronos]

Come to think of it, I've even had a situation where the DM had me not track special ammunition:

Me: So, this ranger feature says that I know what to do to make an animal less likely to attack me. Logically, that means that I also know what to do to make it more likely to attack me, right? I want that T. rex pissed off at me.

DM: Yeah, that makes sense. OK, you quickly tie a torch onto an arrow, and shoot it at the beast's snout. Roll your attack.

In other words, the DM effectively ruled that I'm able to make flaming arrows as part of the same action as shooting them, and he ruled this without me even asking for it. And no, I haven't used this since then, because it doesn't feel right to me (but I wasn't about to argue against a ruling in my favor, at the table).

[CorporateSlave]

Then obviously you believe that spellcasters should track all their spell components.

My understanding was, unless the spell description specifically says the component(s) are consumed in the casting, components are infinitely re-usable.

Tracking the acquisition of components for newly learned spells doesn't seem too out of line though*, and obviously those with a specific GP value attached - particularly if consumable - ought to be tracked.

*Say, if you level up in the wilderness somewhere, or on another plane of existence. Hopefully you were forward thinking enough to mention to the DM back in town that you were getting the components for a spell you were "working on learning..."

[Sigreid]

Ah, the problem of the Tyranny of Fun. On one hand, you want to follow the rules and on the other hand it seems like everything is soooooo.... unnecessary.

I don't generally track my players ammunition. Funnily enough, I generally don't care about ammo but my players prefer to. As such, I leave it to my players; if they want to track ammunition, I let them and if they don't, I don't.

I actually don't track anything on my player's characters. That's their job and I have enough to do. Not unheard of for me to task players with keeping track of what's happening with their enemies in large mook battles.

[Snails]

My understanding was, unless the spell description specifically says the component(s) are consumed in the casting, components are infinitely re-usable.

Good catch.

In earlier editions, the norm was everything mentioned in the spell was consumed unless stated otherwise, where the costs of the consumable was not considered worth tracking unless a price was named.

5e changed that to the Material component is not consumed unless stated as such.

[Snails]

And cantrips shouldn't exist as unlimited at-wills. And getting hit should interrupt a spell being cast.

Clearly you didn't understand how /grognard I was being. :smallamused:

Well, that. :smallbiggrin:

I do not really believe strongly about any particular example, in either direction. I do believe there is a degree of inconsistency between arguably related mechanics worth considering.

As I have said before, I am not actually against tracking everything, for my part. I am motivated by the observation that fine scale bookkeeping seems to get in the way of the fun of some of my friends at the gaming table.

[Chronos]

For what it's worth, the game does still include one spell (Globe of Invulnerability) with a component of negligible cost that's consumed by the spell. So, when a wizard casts Globe of Invulnerability, do you make them track their glass beads?

[noob]

In 3.5 there was a spell that did shoot an arrow and it had as a material component that arrow so it was extra fun to start pulling arrows from your spc to then shoot them with your bow instead of casting the spell just to look at how silly the spell was.

[Tanarii]

For what it's worth, the game does still include one spell (Globe of Invulnerability) with a component of negligible cost that's consumed by the spell. So, when a wizard casts Globe of Invulnerability, do you make them track their glass beads?
XtgE Snare requires 25 ft of rope that is consumed.

It's level 1 so it might be cast frequently before restocking. And 25 ft of rope is cheap, but relatively heavy.

[CorporateSlave]

For what it's worth, the game does still include one spell (Globe of Invulnerability) with a component of negligible cost that's consumed by the spell. So, when a wizard casts Globe of Invulnerability, do you make them track their glass beads?

I'm a player, I don't make anyone track anything. I have a PC that can cast Find Familiar, and I absolutely keep track of how many "sets" of those components I have on me on the road to replace the little guy when he inevitably gets popped. If I knew the spell Globe of Invulnerability, I would also keep track of my glass beads, as they are expendable and I would not reasonably just carry 1000 of them since they're small and cheap.

Spell components and arrows are really comparing apples to oranges anyway, for the most part it is spell slots that will limit "lower level" consumable components - i.e. you're basically never going to use more glass beads in one combat than you could carry in a component pouch (well, without specifically trying to in order to negate this argument anyway). It's pretty easy to burn through a quiver of arrows for anyone with multi-attack, and need to burn an Action refilling it, even from a functionally infinite supply in a Bag of Holding or carried by other PC's, etc.

The only reason I don't track rations is that they DM has made a point of having us not worry about that for the most part we've either been part of a convoy/booked passage/found lodging/ that takes care of our food/drink needs on the road. But I keep track of any other expendables such as ammunition, consumable spell components, torches, oil, etc.

But hey, if it interferes with your fun, then you should probably skip it.