Encumbrance Rules and 'Cheating'

[Fishyninja]

Hi All, so this is a two pronged question. Some explanation is down below but have included a TLDR up here.

I have specifically requested players to use encumbrance rules, half the group have been, have just found out that some other people have not been and some at present are refusing to use/track encumbrance.
Is this cheating? Is there a way to convince people (without kicking them etc) that using encumbrance can be interesting? What is the best way to track others encumbrance?

First of all, what is your general opinion on using Encumbrance? Do you use it to add elements of realism to the game and to present other challenges for the players to overcome? (i.e. 'Wow how are we going to carry all of this gold, armour and loot we just got!) or do you find it too much of an exercise to track.

For those of you who do prefer to use it, do you enforce it and how? Also if you come across players not using it would you consider it cheating?

In my game I have asked the group on multiple occasions to use encumbrance rules (I prefer to use it for a slight aspect of realism and to make characters think about load outs, supplies etc.). Last session, mid-dungeon on Roll20 I find out that some members of the party have not been adhering to this. The person in question was unable to play but mentioned that I could run her character for her, I noticed her character was 90lbs over her encumbrance limit so text her asking if we could talk about it. She was fine with it and we have hashed out her sheet (minor mismanagement) which was all conducted after the session.

However during the session I asked people to check the encumbrances and found out that some people didn't really want to track encumbrance and some flat out refused to saying it was not important.
I countered saying that it is in-fact important as weight affects many important aspects of the game, i.e. Mage hand carrying 10lbs, Bag of holding carrying 500lbs and has the potential to burst. Carrying a downed team mate etc.

I got the general responses of "Well other DM's don't do this" and "I didn't want to really have to do math everytime I pick an item up etc."
I explained to them that the sheets on Roll20 automatically calculate weights for 99% of the items you pick up and for that 1% they don't to check with me.

Anyway after finishing the session I had some players approach me saying that the fact I asked them to track encumbrance feels like I am taking control from their character. I obviously responded with that was not the case and I am asking them to follow a rule that is established and has mechanical effects in the game.

They then stated I was accusing them of cheating, and although I did not say it in those words. I think they are right.

So I am now presented with a situation where:
1) I forgo encumbrance for some things (like item weights, gold etc) but apply it to spells and magic item restrictions and have to trust my players that they will behave and will not try to break the game with it.

2) Enforce encumbrance, potentially pissing off a few players, mid-dungeon and trust them to do as I asked (which they haven't done already)

3) Enforce Encumbrance and think of a way to track their encumbrance on my own along with everything else I need to do as a DM.

Any advice?

EDITS OF NOTE

We use Roll20 for the Game so weights for most of the items are automatically calculated
We are using simple encumbrance (Strength Score x 15)
The encumbrance rule was established in Session 0 and all players have this as a document to refer too.
The players are not new, they are seasoned, as is the campaign. Usually most issues can be resolved in game but this one has been going on for nearly a week with no end in sight.
I have made a macro for Roll20 that shows me what a characters total and current encumbrance is.


Current Decision
I have made a macro to help me as the DM track the players encumbrance. I have also just text the entire party stating that we did all agree to use the encumbrance rules in session 0 and that I would like to continue to do that, however if they do not wish too we can have a chat about it and work out something potentially.

I have stated that if we are going to do encumbrance, if a player doesn't know the weight of something (i.e. not in the PHB) then let me know and I'll add it in after session Unless it is going to make them over encumbered in the session.

[Pelle]

Wanting, or not, to track encumbrance is understandable, that's personal preference for what people find fun. You just got to talk with your group and agree on something together.

If you are going to use encumbrance, it needs to be meaningful and simple to track, however! If you can achieve that it will be easier to sway people who are negative to it.

So switch to a slot based encumbrance system, see Knave for how to do it well. And only use it in situations where their resources are actually limited. If they are in a city where everything is available it is just meaningless busywork. If you are delving into the underworld where every torch counts for how long you can stay (be sure to also include 10 min exploration turns!), then tracking encumbrance can become a fun resource management game.

[Fishyninja]

Wanting, or not, to track encumbrance is understandable, that's personal preference for what people find fun. You just got to talk with your group and agree on something together.

If you are going to use encumbrance, it needs to be meaningful and simple to track, however! If you can achieve that it will be easier to sway people who are negative to it.

So switch to a slot based encumbrance system, see Knave for how to do it well. And only use it in situations where their resources are actually limited. If they are in a city where everything is available it is just meaningless busywork. If you are delving into the underworld where every torch counts for how long you can stay (be sure to also include 10 min exploration turns!), then tracking encumbrance can become a fun resource management game.

Potentially. In all honesty I think the 5E Encumbrance method is fine, people are just being picky about going:

"Well I picked up 10 items this session, you expect me to look into the PHB to find the weights?!"

Which Roll20 does for you anyway.

I agree with them in the sense that 'most' times encumbrance does not really matter but if you have a party who are say at 99% capacity, and they find a crap ton of gold (tens of thousands of pieces) then suddenly it becomes important because they physically cannot carry all of it. Again with my example of the bag of holding, it has a weight limit which has consequences.

It seems to me that some of the players want a game without consequence and to me that sort of removes the point of D&D

[Pelle]

It seems to me that some of the players want a game without consequence and to me that sort of removes the point of D&D

Definitely, and that's fine.

The thing is, yes, your example of the bag of holding with a weight limit - the consequences are usually that it matters for the rules only. But does it matter for the scenario your characters find themselves in? Does it matter in the fiction, or can you just handwave it? Yes, I can't carry all the gold now, but since there is no pressure we can just narrate going back to town multiple times, whatever.

For it to be meaningful you need to lead with the fictional consequences, not "according to the rules...". You find a big treasure pile, you can't carry everything, and when you come back the goblins will have been here and picked up what you left - what do you choose? That's a meaningful choice, and the encumbrance rules are there to support it, but they are not the goal themselves.

If the players trust you, you don't even need to use an encumbrance system to give them meaningful choices. You can then just say things like that they are only able to carry supplies for a week of trek in the wilderness, and then hit them with heavy consequences if they don't reach their destination in time. Or in a dungeon delve you can say that they are low on torches, and have 1 hour left of light, do they continue or head back up? And then build consequences on the fiction established, but you have made it into agency for the players by formulating it as a choice first.

[Unoriginal]

If as a DM I explicitly told a player we were using a rule for this campaign, and they refuse to do it, it would show they don't want to play with me and I'd certainly not want to play with them after that.

It's not about the rules, it's about respecting people. It doesn't matter what the rule is, if they wanted to not use it they should have tried to convince the DM to not use it and accepted the outcome.

[Chronic]

I think tracking encumbrance is as important as tracking rations and water in 5e. Spoiler, it's not. In a normal game, there is so much way of avoiding the problem that no one cares about it. By enforcing it the only thing you gonna do is force your player to find a way to not care again.

Don't get me wrong with some group you can totally do it, we do it in mine and we like it, because it push us to think about what item and means of transportation we would need during exploration, but many people don't care and it's fine.

[Fishyninja]

Definitely, and that's fine.

The thing is, yes, your example of the bag of holding with a weight limit - the consequences are usually that it matters for the rules only. But does it matter for the scenario your characters find themselves in? Does it matter in the fiction, or can you just handwave it? Yes, I can't carry all the gold now, but since there is no pressure we can just narrate going back to town multiple times, whatever.

For it to be meaningful you need to lead with the fictional consequences, not "according to the rules...". You find a big treasure pile, you can't carry everything, and when you come back the goblins will have been here and picked up what you left - what do you choose? That's a meaningful choice, and the encumbrance rules are there to support it, but they are not the goal themselves.

Exactly! Later in this Dungeon, they will have the opportunity to find 50k in coins. They could take multiple trips to carry it all back to town, which is fine, I have no issues with them asking if they can do this etc. In this case there is consequences for doing multiple trips which they are aware of. What I am trying to avoid is them thinking that there is no consequence for the weight of an item. For example the character who was overweight had been collecting arrows after every combat and had 220 arrows in their inventory. 1 quiver. Hadn't mentioned about bundling up etc. and was assuming that they had no weight (hence becoming over encumbered).

My other concern is that if players think weights of items do not have consequence they will always have the right item on hand (i.e. "Oh Oh Remember I picked up that battering ram in session 2 that weighs 65lbs and I have been carrying this entire time!). If they have been and are not over encumbered, that's fine but I feel that if weights have no consequence they will just hoard.


If the players trust you, you don't even need to use an encumbrance system to give them meaningful choices. You can then just say things like that they are only able to carry supplies for a week of trek in the wilderness, and then hit them with heavy consequences if they don't reach their destination in time. Or in a dungeon delve you can say that they are low on torches, and have 1 hour left of light, do they continue or head back up? And then build consequences on the fiction established, but you have made it into agency for the players by formulating it as a choice first.

99% of the time they are absolutely fine, and there are more than enough meaningful choices for them in game, they love to plan and work stuff out! It is just so out of character to be vehemently against carry weights.


I think tracking encumbrance is as important as tracking rations and water in 5e. Spoiler, it's not. In a normal game, there is so much way of avoiding the problem that no one cares about it. By enforcing it the only thing you gonna do is force your player to find a way to not care again.

Don't get me wrong with some group you can totally do it, we do it in mine and we like it, because it push us to think about what item and means of transportation we would need during exploration, but many people don't care and it's fine.

I get you, but the problem is I have some players happy to do so, and some who are not, even though I have asked as the DM for them to use Encumbrance. I really don't want to get into a huge disagreement with them over this but I cannot be running rules differently between the party members.

[Zhorn]

Since you are on roll20 and it does most of the work for you and the other players, their gripes about not wanting to use it are just that 'tiny' bit irrelevant.

To get my biases out in the open, I'm pro-encumbrance, be that playing pen&paper or playing over a VTT.
If the DM says they want to play using encumbrance, that table is playing using encumbrance.
If the player(s) don't want to play using encumbrance, either they can offer to DM instead, or find a new table.

It can sound harsh for pen&paper games, but when playing online with VTTs and digital tools that automatically track this for you, along with access to other games and players all over the world to find tables/players with matching taste, just do as requested or find a table that is ok with you not tracking. Replacement tables and players are not in short supply.

Being said, I also agree to make sure the relevance of it is being highlighted often enough within a campaign to have meaning to the players.
They find an npc with broken legs, do they carry them out of the cave, or leave them behind to focus on carrying treasure?
A broken log trap is outside the orc's lair. The log is heavy, but if the players have the lift/carry capacity to reset the trap it can be used to eliminate any hostiles they try to enter/exit the lair after the party.
etc

[kingcheesepants]

I can certainly understand where both you and your players are coming from. Having encumbrance can make certain choices matter more and can force you to be a little more creative and it does add a bit of realism. Also Roll 20 does indeed track your encumbrance and assuming that you're mostly carrying gear from the SRD it doesn't take more than typing the item into the search bar to add it in. The players do not have to do math and it's barely an inconvenience to check that you aren't over encumbered.

So why the reluctance by your players? Well they might not realize how easy it is to track stuff using the online tools. But more basic than that is that they are here to play a fun adventuring game where they get to run around and be heroes and beat up monsters and make daring plans and hoodwink devious nobles and such. Micromanaging how many blankets and caltrops and cooking sets they can carry isn't the game they want to play. You don't have them describe how they use the bathroom in the wilderness and you don't talk about their hygiene routine or how they set up tents or take care of the animals. Those things can add realism and immersion and some complexities of adventuring but they aren't what they came here for.

In my games we basically don't have encumbrance. (your option 1, it matters for spell carry weight and large things) also I want to know what the players have on their person within quick grabbing distance. Basically their equipped weapons/armor/accessories and in combat items. Everything that's small or tiny and isn't an equipped or ready to use item goes into the shared bag of holding. So that would be their food, camping supplies, tools, money, rope, random magic items they aren't actually using. If they need to carry something medium or large than that might be an exercise for the team to do (once they had to make a sled for a person that was turned to stone and occasionally they'll find a treasure horde that's too big to fit in the bag.) I haven't had any trouble with my players abusing this but if they do, well they have a lot of important things in that bag, it would be a shame if something were to happen to it...

I've played in games where we had to track how many rations we have and how heavy is your sleeping bag and how many tools do you have on you, and it was a lot less fun and a lot more micromanaging stuff and just slowed everything down. If you're doing a survival type campaign and your players want to focus more on resource management than by all means. But it sounds like they really aren't interested in that and maybe it's fine if you guys don't sweat it.

[Fishyninja]

Since you are on roll20 and it does most of the work for you and the other players, their gripes about not wanting to use it are just that 'tiny' bit irrelevant.

To get my biases out in the open, I'm pro-encumbrance, be that playing pen&paper or playing over a VTT.
If the DM says they want to play using encumbrance, that table is playing using encumbrance.
If the player(s) don't want to play using encumbrance, either they can offer to DM instead, or find a new table.

It can sound harsh for pen&paper games, but when playing online with VTTs and digital tools that automatically track this for you, along with access to other games and players all over the world to find tables/players with matching taste, just do as requested or find a table that is ok with you not tracking. Replacement tables and players are not in short supply.

Being said, I also agree to make sure the relevance of it is being highlighted often enough within a campaign to have meaning to the players.
They find an npc with broken legs, do they carry them out of the cave, or leave them behind to focus on carrying treasure?
A broken log trap is outside the orc's lair. The log is heavy, but if the players have the lift/carry capacity to reset the trap it can be used to eliminate any hostiles they try to enter/exit the lair after the party.
etc

You seem to have the same feelings as Pelle in regards to making the choices meaningful and I am doing that. Or at least attempting too.
To further expand the example I mentioned earlier. They could potentially find 50k in GP.
As also mentioned they could make multiple trips back to town, the problem is every trip requires an ascent and descent down a mountain with no path so there are risks of climbing etc etc, random encounters. It is also established that in my game that if you do not want to/cannot carry your cash, there is a bank in which your money can be deposited. Some have used this feature.

When they travel anywhere I ask them, 'How are you travelling? Walking, with the horses? Are you including the cart?' I am reinforcing this to try to make them think.....Ok we have different carrying capacities based on what we pick etc. Maybe I am going about it the wrong way.


I can certainly understand where both you and your players are coming from. Having encumbrance can make certain choices matter more and can force you to be a little more creative and it does add a bit of realism. Also Roll 20 does indeed track your encumbrance and assuming that you're mostly carrying gear from the SRD it doesn't take more than typing the item into the search bar to add it in. The players do not have to do math and it's barely an inconvenience to check that you aren't over encumbered.

All the players have more experience than me as a player and DM (most of them have been playing 20+ years, I am on my 5th year)


So why the reluctance by your players? Well they might not realize how easy it is to track stuff using the online tools. But more basic than that is that they are here to play a fun adventuring game where they get to run around and be heroes and beat up monsters and make daring plans and hoodwink devious nobles and such. Micromanaging how many blankets and caltrops and cooking sets they can carry isn't the game they want to play. You don't have them describe how they use the bathroom in the wilderness and you don't talk about their hygiene routine or how they set up tents or take care of the animals. Those things can add realism and immersion and some complexities of adventuring but they aren't what they came here for.

In my games we basically don't have encumbrance. (your option 1, it matters for spell carry weight and large things) also I want to know what the players have on their person within quick grabbing distance. Basically their equipped weapons/armor/accessories and in combat items. Everything that's small or tiny and isn't an equipped or ready to use item goes into the shared bag of holding. So that would be their food, camping supplies, tools, money, rope, random magic items they aren't actually using. If they need to carry something medium or large than that might be an exercise for the team to do (once they had to make a sled for a person that was turned to stone and occasionally they'll find a treasure horde that's too big to fit in the bag.) I haven't had any trouble with my players abusing this but if they do, well they have a lot of important things in that bag, it would be a shame if something were to happen to it...

I've played in games where we had to track how many rations we have and how heavy is your sleeping bag and how many tools do you have on you, and it was a lot less fun and a lot more micromanaging stuff and just slowed everything down. If you're doing a survival type campaign and your players want to focus more on resource management than by all means. But it sounds like they really aren't interested in that and maybe it's fine if you guys don't sweat it.

I think they realise how easy it is to track and they do make sure they keep track (with reminders) of what they are carrying. A turn in combat usually starts with "Using my carried weapon I attack" or "I drop my carried weapon and draw my secondary weapon using my free action".
In regards to the complexity of adventuring. I agree, most people do not enjoy micromanaging I know I don't.

To me at present if I, for example, go with Option 1. It may almost feel like I am letting some players get away with being over-encumbered while some will perfectly RP being over-encumbered which doesn't seem fair.
Now for most of my players I wouldn't worry about this too much but now I am of the opinion (which could be entirely wrong) that the ones who are denying it the most will now be players who will go "Oh great 50K gp, just going to slide that into my pockets and walk out of here" and when I try to explain how that is not possible will cause the session to stall which is not fair on the players who have been following my request.

[Unoriginal]

Definitely, and that's fine.


but many people don't care and it's fine.


It's fine to not want X in your game, but it's definitively, 100% not fine to play in a game where there is X and ignore it because you don't want it.

If you don't want X in your game and there is X in the game you're about to join, then don't join. Or try to convince people to remove X and only join if they agree to do it.

[Pelle]

Exactly! Later in this Dungeon, they will have the opportunity to find 50k in coins. They could take multiple trips to carry it all back to town, which is fine, I have no issues with them asking if they can do this etc. In this case there is consequences for doing multiple trips which they are aware of. What I am trying to avoid is them thinking that there is no consequence for the weight of an item. For example the character who was overweight had been collecting arrows after every combat and had 220 arrows in their inventory. 1 quiver. Hadn't mentioned about bundling up etc. and was assuming that they had no weight (hence becoming over encumbered).

My other concern is that if players think weights of items do not have consequence they will always have the right item on hand (i.e. "Oh Oh Remember I picked up that battering ram in session 2 that weighs 65lbs and I have been carrying this entire time!). If they have been and are not over encumbered, that's fine but I feel that if weights have no consequence they will just hoard.

I'll say don't worry about it until it actually matters. Then you can ask for a tally and see what they are actually able to bring. And if you think it will matter in the short future, give a heads up to let them know so it don't become a gotcha. Just ask and establish things in the fiction that you can build upon later, is anyone bringing a rope? how many arrows do you carry? etc. Be sure to warn them of potential consequences based on what they choose, and make it a choice between different worthwhile options, which kind of situations they want to be prepared for. And as long as it doesn't strain anyones suspension of disbelief it is ok. If it suddenly does for someone then you can do a tally or just say that they need to leave the battering ram behind if they so prefer.

[Fishyninja]

I'll say don't worry about it until it actually matters. Then you can ask for a tally and see what they are actually able to bring. And if you think it will matter in the short future, give a heads up to let them know so it don't become a gotcha. Just ask and establish things in the fiction that you can build upon later, is anyone bringing a rope? how many arrows do you carry? etc. Be sure to warn them of potential consequences based on what they choose, and make it a choice between different worthwhile options, which kind of situations they want to be prepared for. And as long as it doesn't strain anyones suspension of disbelief it is ok. If it suddenly does for someone then you can do a tally or just say that they need to leave the battering ram behind if they so prefer.

That is what I generally do. I never want to assume anything my players do, because it will always be something out of left field! Maybe I am making a mountain out of a molehill.

[Aett_Thorn]

So my groups have gone through a few different types of encumbrance measuring, and I feel like as much as we appreciate it for its attempted realism, oftentimes it doesn't actually give you realism. A high strength character can carry a sometimes ridiculous amount of normal stuff if they limit themselves to just a couple of weapons and their armor otherwise. Meanwhile, many classes can be encumbered just with their starting gear and need to ditch stuff right away before going on their first adventure. If you use the variant encumbrance rules (the 5x str score before feeling effects) this can get even worse.

While yes, being online and using a tool that does the math automatically makes it somewhat easier. But it can still lead to some ridiculous circumstances. For instance, a character can carry 20,000 ball bearings for only 20 pounds. This has no impact on their ability to be stealthy or even weight them down all that much. But I bet if you tried to carry that many ball bearings, even if they were securely strapped to your belt or in a backpack, that you'd feel their weight.

We've used a few slot-based inventories, too. Which are somewhat better, but tend to have some odd rules of their own from what we've found. "Oh, you're a Str-based character? You get extra slots because you're strong. But your heavy armor takes up those extra slots so it doesn't matter in the end." And that two pound bag of ball bearings take up as much room as that 20-pound gold statue that you found. So this can be finicky, too.

The trick is to find an easy system that is also fun for players to use. That is going to depend on your players, in the end. But the system that we've settled on, and really seem to like, is this: https://imgur.com/a/4fxqI

First page is a saddlebag, but second page is a backpack-based inventory system. We like it because it gives different types of players different ways to increase their space for various items. High Str characters can carry an extra big thing and more coins, high Con characters can carry more bulky stuff. Smart players can pack better in the main bag, and high Dex characters can store delicate items in their main bag without breaking them. It also doesn't account for what you are using as your main stuff, like the armor you're wearing or the weapons in your hands, which is nice. It's been both fun and helps with realism, we've found.

[tchntm43]

I use it, but I also think you have to be a little loose with the rules on it otherwise it drags down the game. Like, you don't want to watch the encumbrance of one player and then as they pick up a couple coins go "Ah! You're over the weight limit!" What I would do instead is let them pass the limit but as they are traveling tell the player something like "You're feeling unusually exhausted and your feet and shoulders really hurt." And if another player picks up the backpack, then tell them "Wow, his backpack is really heavy."

Also, if the party has horses, I try and encourage them to put anything they don't need to take with them into the dungeon on the horse.

I try not to burden the players with rules like this. I keep my own copies of their character sheets so that I don't have ask them to add up weight or even tell me what they have. To save time, I made an Excel file that allows me to keep a list of items typed by name and it matches it with weight numbers listed on another tab and sums them up. So if a character gets something, I enter it on the file on the laptop I have open next to me and it updates how much the character is carrying.

It's kind of like food and water. You don't want to interrupt the party's adventuring to tell them "you must take a break to eat lunch" and you definitely don't want to say "you have no food because you forgot to buy new rations last time you were in town." It's better just to be proactive and when they're in town, tell them to take off 5 SP or whatever to restock food and water. And if I forget to tell them and realize later on, I just say "Oh, forgot that you guys had to buy food and water back in town. You can just take off the 5 SP now, no big deal." And I just assume the characters are munching in breaks when the players are taking longer than expected to discuss strategy outside of combat, which always happens more often than I anticipate.

[stoutstien]

All depends on session zero expectations. If I want to run a game that tracks resources and none of the players buy-in, I either shelf that campaign or find players who do want to participate.

I also just use a slot based encumbrance system because it's both faster and more fun.

[elyktsorb]

Honestly never quite see the importance of encumbrance because 9 times out of 10 a character will realistically run out of room to carry things before they go overweight.

[Sigreid]

I theoretically use Encumbrance, but I don't personally track it for the party as I have enough to manage as a DM and leave that to the players. Most of the time it isn't that important, and when it is I ask.

That said, it's not much of a burden on the players since we play using a digital desktop that calculates that for us.

[Fishyninja]

The trick is to find an easy system that is also fun for players to use. That is going to depend on your players, in the end. But the system that we've settled on, and really seem to like, is this: https://imgur.com/a/4fxqI

First page is a saddlebag, but second page is a backpack-based inventory system. We like it because it gives different types of players different ways to increase their space for various items. High Str characters can carry an extra big thing and more coins, high Con characters can carry more bulky stuff. Smart players can pack better in the main bag, and high Dex characters can store delicate items in their main bag without breaking them. It also doesn't account for what you are using as your main stuff, like the armor you're wearing or the weapons in your hands, which is nice. It's been both fun and helps with realism, we've found.

Hmm. I like this.


I use it, but I also think you have to be a little loose with the rules on it otherwise it drags down the game. Like, you don't want to watch the encumbrance of one player and then as they pick up a couple coins go "Ah! You're over the weight limit!" What I would do instead is let them pass the limit but as they are traveling tell the player something like "You're feeling unusually exhausted and your feet and shoulders really hurt." And if another player picks up the backpack, then tell them "Wow, his backpack is really heavy."

I get you, a few coins are not going to matter but a large haul is a different matter. The RP aspect is something I try to utilise all the time.


Also, if the party has horses, I try and encourage them to put anything they don't need to take with them into the dungeon on the horse.
Again as mentioned before hand I ask them how they are travelling etc, this dungeon is difficult as it is in a mountain (about 400ft above ground).


I try not to burden the players with rules like this. I keep my own copies of their character sheets so that I don't have ask them to add up weight or even tell me what they have. To save time, I made an Excel file that allows me to keep a list of items typed by name and it matches it with weight numbers listed on another tab and sums them up. So if a character gets something, I enter it on the file on the laptop I have open next to me and it updates how much the character is carrying.

Since I am working on Roll20, I might play around with a Macro.


I theoretically use Encumbrance, but I don't personally track it for the party as I have enough to manage as a DM and leave that to the players. Most of the time it isn't that important, and when it is I ask.

That said, it's not much of a burden on the players since we play using a digital desktop that calculates that for us.

Well this is the point, I shouldn't have to track it but I have players who have admitted to not following the rules. I don't exactly want to boot a player in the middle of a campaign for this but I want them to understand the rules are there for a reason.

[Unoriginal]

Maybe I am making a mountain out of a molehill.

You're not.

It's not a question of the Encumbrance rules, it's a question of you telling your players a rule, your players nodding and then saying "yeah, I'm not doing that."

You are the DM. If they agreed for you to be their DM, they agreed to follow your calls. Those players didn't, on purpose.

If they don't respect you by refusing to follow a rule, there's no reason they'd respect you for anything else.

It's like... many DMs won't actually ask the PCs to track down costly components for spells, because "it's easier not to" or the like. And it's perfectly fine if the DMs and players prefer it that way. But if the DM says "yeah you do need the actual components if you're casting something with a gp cost", because they prefer those things to matter, it would be a *huge* lack of respect for a Cleric player to go "yeah no I won't do that, I want to raise the dead easily".

[Fishyninja]

You're not.

It's not a question of the Encumbrance rules, it's a question of you telling your players a rule, your players nodding and then saying "yeah, I'm not doing that."

You are the DM. If they agreed for you to be their DM, they agreed to follow your calls. Those players didn't, on purpose.

If they don't respect you by refusing to follow a rule, there's no reason they'd respect you for anything else.

It's like... many DMs won't actually ask the PCs to track down costly components for spells, because "it's easier not to" or the like. And it's perfectly fine if the DMs and players prefer it that way. But if the DM says "yeah you do need the actual components if you're casting something with a gp cost", because they prefer those things to matter, it would be a *huge* lack of respect for a Cleric player to go "yeah no I won't do that, I want to raise the dead easily".

This hits the nail on the head. I do not bother with spell components (unless super rare) and the players like that. In reality I think the players (of which it is a small number) just want an easy ride. Ironically. I actually had put off giving them a Bag of Holding because I wanted them to take into account weights. Now that they have the bag it is what has brought all these questions up!

[Sigreid]

This hits the nail on the head. I do not bother with spell components (unless super rare) and the players like that. In reality I think the players (of which it is a small number) just want an easy ride. Ironically. I actually had put off giving them a Bag of Holding because I wanted them to take into account weights. Now that they have the bag it is what has brought all these questions up!

Sounds like they're more interested in the role play of the game than the math of the game. Also sounds like you don't have agreement from the table on how things are going to be played.

[Unoriginal]

This hits the nail on the head. I do not bother with spell components (unless super rare) and the players like that. In reality I think the players (of which it is a small number) just want an easy ride. Ironically. I actually had put off giving them a Bag of Holding because I wanted them to take into account weights. Now that they have the bag it is what has brought all these questions up!

Note that a Bag of Holding still has a limit in weight and in volume, not to mention the question of if it can go through the bag's opening.

But yeah, nothing wrong with a game where those things aren't a concern. PLENTY of wrong if you agreed to a game where those things are a concern and decided to break that agreement.

A player going "I have 8 STR and I'm carrying three full plate armor in my backpack" is only a problem if they're not respecting what the DM ruled. And that's what happening here.

If the DM rules that being hit by an out-of-control wagon is 3d10 damage, a player can't just nod and roll 1d6 because they think it's more appropriate. This is the same.


Also sounds like you don't have agreement from the table on how things are going to be played.

There was an agreement. And then some players decided to not follow the terms.


Sounds like they're more interested in the role play of the game than the math of the game.

Sounds like they're more interested in not respecting the DM's rulings than in respecting them.

[Kurt Kurageous]

I personally don't enjoy playing "keeper of weights, rations, water, and ammunitions." These are things that matter a lot less in a game where you can pretend to be an elf. It's a game, and games are supposed to be fun, so why should I do things that are work? I'm on paper (still).

If you as DM like the fiddly stuff or you run on a computer that tracks that stuff, tell us why that adds fun to the game. Because it didn't in every single version of face to face D&D I have experienced. Maybe it's fun for you.

As many have said, I worry about weight only when it matters.

At my table, ammunition is lost when you roll a 1 or a 20, and must be replaced if you've been out of town awhile (unless you are proficient with fletcher tools). As you can imagine, this stops players from carrying around a barrel full of arrows/bolts. 40 is normally way more than you would need unless you are going to play OOTA. OOTA is an extreme case, and part of the reason I'm never going to run or play it and am sorry I bought the book.

[Unoriginal]

I personally don't enjoy playing "keeper of weights, rations, water, and ammunitions." These are things that matter a lot less in a game where you can pretend to be an elf. It's a game, and games are supposed to be fun, so why should I do things that are work? I'm on paper (still).

If you as DM like the fiddly stuff or you run on a computer that tracks that stuff, tell us why that adds fun to the game. Because it didn't in every single version of face to face D&D I have experienced. Maybe it's fun for you.

It doesn't matter what the reason is. It could be an exploration Hexcrawl à la ToA, where food rationing maters, or it could be the DM doesn't enjoy PCs hauling half of a Giant's kitchen because "loot is loot".

What matters is that the rules were presented, agreed upon, and then disregarded.

[Lord Ruby34]

You're not.

It's not a question of the Encumbrance rules, it's a question of you telling your players a rule, your players nodding and then saying "yeah, I'm not doing that."

You are the DM. If they agreed for you to be their DM, they agreed to follow your calls. Those players didn't, on purpose.

If they don't respect you by refusing to follow a rule, there's no reason they'd respect you for anything else.

It's like... many DMs won't actually ask the PCs to track down costly components for spells, because "it's easier not to" or the like. And it's perfectly fine if the DMs and players prefer it that way. But if the DM says "yeah you do need the actual components if you're casting something with a gp cost", because they prefer those things to matter, it would be a *huge* lack of respect for a Cleric player to go "yeah no I won't do that, I want to raise the dead easily".

On the other hand, you are only the DM with player buy in. If you're the only one at the table who actually likes encumbrance, I'd just ditch it. I know a lot of people do, or just ask how are you carrying that? Where on your body are you putting these things?

The most important part of DnD is to make sure everyone is having fun. If a rule isn't fun for your players to the point that they are actively objecting to it, you need to ask yourself if the rule is important enough to keep using. Is encumbrance adding fun, or limiting it?

Being the DM isn't about being in charge of the group, or even the game. The game belongs to everyone, and everyone needs to get on the same page about the rule. If everyone agreed, and then ignored it, that isn't cool, but what that means is you need to sit down out of character and talk about how important this is to everyone, you included, as the DM is a player too, and your opinion matters just as much as the opinion of your players.

[Fishyninja]

Sounds like they're more interested in the role play of the game than the math of the game. Also sounds like you don't have agreement from the table on how things are going to be played.


Being the DM isn't about being in charge of the group, or even the game. The game belongs to everyone, and everyone needs to get on the same page about the rule. If everyone agreed, and then ignored it, that isn't cool, but what that means is you need to sit down out of character and talk about how important this is to everyone, you included, as the DM is a player too, and your opinion matters just as much as the opinion of your players.

Which is what I don't understand. We play on Roll20 and run the voice over Discord.
I literally have a text server with all the game rules established so they either have not read it or are choosing to ignore it.

I mean all the players are heavy on RP but some of them love the fact of RPing item management. Hence why it feels like a few select players are trying to 'cheat'.

This is the crux. Half the players are buying in, the other half are not even though the rules have been established and we have been playing weekly for over a year.
Some of the players are acting if this is a new rule.

[MoiMagnus]

Is this cheating?

(1) If you hide the fact that you are breaking the rules and pretend that you don't, that's cheating.
(2) If you openly reject the rules set in place, that's not cheating, as there is no deception. However such disagreement is incompatible with continuing to play. One must either find rules everybody agrees to, or split the tables into groups of like-minded peoples to start two different campaigns.
(3) If you don't respect the rules "to the letter" and just apply some rough approximation of it because you assumed that the DM was not that serious about applying the encumbrance rules, then that's a misunderstanding, and after a good talk you should end up in (1) or (2)

We personally never play with encumbrance as I've never encountered a player IRL who really wanted to, but I know some tables use apps to automatically compute encumbrance. If the problem is just peoples being lazy, I heavily encourage you to find one of those phone app and ask the players to use them.

Another possible solution is to guide them more toward solution to encumbrance problems. In an adventure with encumbrance rules, peoples use mounts and vehicles to carry stuff. No one in their right mind would go into an adventure with everything on their back. In our current campaign, despite the fact that we don't use encumbrance rules explicitly, we still take some time before each "adventure" to plan for the expedition, recruiting 5-10 NPCs to guard for the provisions and carry loot, etc. But we would not have started doing that if the DM didn't first guide us into doing it. [By making us the first expedition be organised by someone else]

[Unoriginal]

On the other hand, you are only the DM with player buy in.

Sure.


If you're the only one at the table who actually likes encumbrance, I'd just ditch it.

If I'm the only one at the table who wants to play with encumbrance, and I actually want to play a campaign with encumbrance, then I leave the table and let them play without it. Or keep playing with that table and try to find another who would like to play with encumbrance, if it's not a deal breaker.



The most important part of DnD is to make sure everyone is having fun.

Everyone, including the DM. Being disrespected is not fun.


If a rule isn't fun for your players to the point that they are actively objecting to it, you need to ask yourself if the rule is important enough to keep using. Is encumbrance adding fun, or limiting it?

The players were not *objecting* to the rule.

If a player made an objection to the rule, then it could be discussed and the DM can decide what to do.


This is players who *agreed* to follow the rule, then decided not to, showing a total lack of concern and respect for the agreement and DM.


Which is what I don't understand. We play on Roll20 and run the voice over Discord.
I literally have a text server with all the game rules established so they either have not read it or are choosing to ignore it.

I mean all the players are heavy on RP but some of them love the fact of RPing item management. Hence why it feels like a few select players are trying to 'cheat'.

This is the crux. Half the players are buying in, the other half are not even though the rules have been established and we have been playing weekly for over a year.
Some of the players are acting if this is a new rule.

Have you gone over the other rules with your players, just to see if they're following those?

[Fishyninja]

(1) If you hide the fact that you are breaking the rules and pretend that you don't, that's cheating.
(2) If you openly reject the rules set in place, that's not cheating, as there is no deception. However such disagreement is incompatible with continuing to play. One must either find rules everybody agrees to, or split the tables into groups of like-minded peoples to start two different campaigns.
(3) If you don't respect the rules "to the letter" and just apply some rough approximation of it because you assumed that the DM was not that serious about applying the encumbrance rules, then that's a misunderstanding, and after a good talk you should end up in (1) or (2)

We personally never play with encumbrance as I've never encountered a player IRL who really wanted to, but I know some tables use apps to automatically compute encumbrance. If the problem is just peoples being lazy, I heavily encourage you to find one of those phone app and ask the players to use them.

Another possible solution is to guide them more toward solution to encumbrance problems. In an adventure with encumbrance rules, peoples use mounts and vehicles to carry stuff. No one in their right mind would go into an adventure with everything on their back. In our current campaign, despite the fact that we don't use encumbrance rules explicitly, we still take some time before each "adventure" to plan for the expedition, recruiting 5-10 NPCs to guard for the provisions and carry loot, etc. But we would not have started doing that if the DM didn't first guide us into doing it. [By making us the first expedition be organised by someone else]

It seems the dissenting players are of a mix of 2 and 3 and since we play on a VTT it automatically does it all for you, so I do not know why there is an issue. Looking at your last paragraph the group are heavy into organization before an adventure, they all have horses, work out if they need their cart or retainer etc. So they are familiar with the idea of planning it is just some of them are ignoring encumbrance which usually is fine in some aspects but when they suddenly come across a life changing amount of loot I don't want them to just insert '20k GP' onto their sheet and wander out!

[JonBeowulf]

I personally don't enjoy playing "keeper of weights, rations, water, and ammunitions." These are things that matter a lot less in a game where you can pretend to be an elf. It's a game, and games are supposed to be fun, so why should I do things that are work? I'm on paper (still).

If you as DM like the fiddly stuff or you run on a computer that tracks that stuff, tell us why that adds fun to the game. Because it didn't in every single version of face to face D&D I have experienced. Maybe it's fun for you.

As many have said, I worry about weight only when it matters.

At my table, ammunition is lost when you roll a 1 or a 20, and must be replaced if you've been out of town awhile (unless you are proficient with fletcher tools). As you can imagine, this stops players from carrying around a barrel full of arrows/bolts. 40 is normally way more than you would need unless you are going to play OOTA. OOTA is an extreme case, and part of the reason I'm never going to run or play it and am sorry I bought the book.

How can you worry about weight only when it matters if you have no idea how much burden you're already under?

I don't make anyone track it in face-to-face games, but I know exactly what they started with and can spend a couple of brain cycles to keep a general idea on how loaded they are.

In VTT, encumbrance is on. That's a bullet point in my default Session 0 notes so it's never missed. Don't like it? Play elsewhere. Disabled it and got caught? Play elsewhere ('cause you're out of my game).

[Warder]

It's funny, I have a related issue that's just come up over the past couple weeks. We use Encumbrance rules at our table and have since we started. It's not been a problem, we usually "audit" our character inventories after sessions so we don't have to look up weight on esoteric stuff while we play. For our most recent campaign (where I'm a player, not a DM) we've also implemented some homebrew rules for feats, where it's possible to pick some things to make heavy armor more feasible without getting encumbered.

(As a sidenote, characters focusing on Str usually get to carry less stuff than others since armor weighs so much under variant Encumbrance rules. It kinda sucks.)

Anyway, in our group of 5 + DM, it turns out that two of the players have been fairly consistently "cheating" with their encumbrance, as in, "I can't be bothered tracking it that closely, I just get a feel for when I'm starting to go over the limit". So they're not opposed to tracking encumbrance, they just don't want to be bothered with the math. Normally, and especially as a player, this wouldn't have bothered me at all. It's still in the spirit of why we adopted the rules, and they're not actively trying to cheat for an advantage. But since we've made changes to our feat system I've actually invested resources into making my character able to be effective in heavy armor, so it suddenly bothers me a lot - feat points don't come around that often, after all. I plan on bringing it up at our next session, but I think it highlights the importance of hashing out why you're using the rules in the first place, and finding a level of math tracking everyone's happy with.

[Lord Ruby34]

Which is what I don't understand. We play on Roll20 and run the voice over Discord.
I literally have a text server with all the game rules established so they either have not read it or are choosing to ignore it.

I mean all the players are heavy on RP but some of them love the fact of RPing item management. Hence why it feels like a few select players are trying to 'cheat'.

This is the crux. Half the players are buying in, the other half are not even though the rules have been established and we have been playing weekly for over a year.
Some of the players are acting if this is a new rule.

Knowing people, it's probably that they didn't read it, skimmed it, or forgot. People are very good at forgetting things they don't like.

The only solution is to talk about it. What is encumbrance adding to your game, and is it worth annoying the people who hate it? Is it worth the possibility of imploding your game?

(Another question, are these players your friends? Do you hang out with them outside DnD? If so, you have to cooperate with them more than you would if they were randoms for social reasons. That's my situation, and my advice is tailored towards it.)

[Fishyninja]

How can you worry about weight only when it matters if you have no idea how much burden you're already under?

I don't make anyone track it in face-to-face games, but I know exactly what they started with and can spend a couple of brain cycles to keep a general idea on how loaded they are.

In VTT, encumbrance is on. That's a bullet point in my default Session 0 notes so it's never missed. Don't like it? Play elsewhere. Disabled it and got caught? Play elsewhere ('cause you're out of my game).

I don't religiously track it either I have been trusting my players to do so and since I play in a VTT it is also turned on by default, while normally the 'play elsewhere' option would be good for a new group this is a group that has been established for over a year. Don't get me wrong I have no issues with dealing with problem players but it seems that this is (hopefully) a minor infraction that can be resolved.

[Tanarii]

Excuses are like opinions, everyone has one and they stink.

It's the default rules. If you didn't explain there was a house rule excepting it from the rules when you started the campaign, the reasonable expectation is it applies.

Your choices at this point appear to be to tell them you're not house ruling to hand wave encumberance away and risk losing your players, or house rule to hand wave it away because most of the players want the house rule. Either is okay, but IMO before you do, point out that next time they want a fundamental house rule change they should point it out a the beginning of the campaign.

Also probably check if they're tracking use of ammo, rations, torches. And gold pieces when they spend it for that matter.


There was an agreement. And then some players decided to not follow the terms.

Sounds like they're more interested in not respecting the DM's rulings than in respecting them.Also this. On the other hand, if they're merely grumbling about a ruling in session then approaching you about it afterwards, it hasn't reached the end times yet.

It's when all that's happened and you make a final decision and they deliberately ignore it that you have a real problem. That'd be worse than walking away. There are always new players.

[Fishyninja]

Knowing people, it's probably that they didn't read it, skimmed it, or forgot. People are very good at forgetting things they don't like.

The only solution is to talk about it. What is encumbrance adding to your game, and is it worth annoying the people who hate it? Is it worth the possibility of imploding your game?

(Another question, are these players your friends? Do you hang out with them outside DnD? If so, you have to cooperate with them more than you would if they were randoms for social reasons. That's my situation, and my advice is tailored towards it.)

We are friends but online so we don't physically meet No.
In regards to your second line it is adding a sense of realism to the game and has been an established rule from day 1. Weight is important, some spells have weight limits on what can be moved and affected. Bags of Holding hold x amount before being ruptured etc. In regards to imploding the game, I don't see that happening but if it does it has been because players rather than talk to the DM have decided to not follow rules we all agreed on. I mean all my players bar one are older than me and have more experience in the game and I do this as a labour of love. I really enjoy the story and their characters I am not trying to do this to 'Showcase my power as DM' or anything I just think that if the rules have been established prior to the game they should be followed.

If the players came to me and said 'Hey Fish, we're not really feeling the encumbrance rules, can we look at that?' I would be more than happy to do so, instead they just ignored the rule and did their own thing.

An exaggerated example would be that if they are going to ignore rules about weight, what next....Oh my weapon does a d20 damage and my crit range is now 1!
I do not think it is going to go that way at all but you see the point, I am trying to run the game with the rules that are laid out and have been agreed upon.


Also probably check if they're tracking use of ammo, rations, torches. And gold pieces when they spend it for that matter.

This has occurred to me, I get it the DM has a load of things to track already but it now feels like I can't trust some of my players at this point.
Going to your point about grumblings in session. I did rule in session that we were meant to be following encumbrance and I will forgive any transgressions up to this point as it may have been accidental and I referred them back to the session 0. However when the players asked me if I was accusing them of cheating this says to me that maybe they might of been and now I feel like as well as running the game I have to make sure certain players are not actively cheating in other things.

I hate it.

[Keravath]

Just a couple of comments ...

1) Which version of encumbrance are you using? The base strength x 15lbs or the variant?

If using the base version, you only need to keep a rough track which Roll20 and most automated character sheets take care of. You only really run into trouble when the players try to carry off large numbers of coins. At least in this version 50 coins weigh about a pound but if you want to carry off 1000gp you are looking at 20 pounds and 10,000gp is 200lbs.

If you are using the variant version then you need to discuss it beforehand. The limits of the variant version are 5 lbs/str point to be encumbered. This means that pretty much every 8 strength character in medium armor will already be encumbered and it makes tracking encumbrance much more onerous and restrictive since it will mechanically affect every day operation of the character all the time and significantly affect game play all of the time. I avoid the variant rule for this reason since I am playing/running D&D and not D&D&IM (IM = Inventory Management). IM is not fun.

On the other hand, you do want to be able to say that the players can't carry all the treasure in one go and even they will usually agree this makes sense.

2) The OP said that one character was 90lbs over and most of it was due to 220 arrows - however 20 arrows is only 1lb so 220 is 11 lbs and well within the carrying capacity of most characters so there were certainly other items being carried that made the character exceed the weight limit.

Finally, the only way to resolve it at the table is with a bit of discussion. Some players really do not like any book keeping at all - they are there to play the game not make lists of everything they are carrying and what it weighs. On the other hand, some players love the details and others are indifferent. Since you are playing on Roll20, most of the weights are automatically added - so most of the time all a player needs to do is look at the sheet. They are already tracking encumbrance because they are using the sheet - the only factor is whether they actually look at what the number says. Since the character sheet is available to everyone, the DM can help folks pare down their inventory a bit.

However, hoarders exist in real life and D&D is no different. Some people just like to take everything they find and don't like giving it up. Other players pick up everything they find because they are used to video games which may or may not use encumbrance. Either way, some players either won't understand why D&D is different or why they might have to leave stuff that they find behind. In both of these cases, the DM needs to have a very simple chat to the group, explain the purpose and meaning of encumbrance (I suggest using only the basic rule, not the variant one), show them how easily it is reported on the character sheet and get the characters who like to collect things the opportunity to remove items from the character sheet so that their carried weight is closer to the limit. Show how the process is easy, not onerous and won't really affect their character - it only limits how much they can carry.

---

3) As for cheating - in my opinion, no they weren't. No one would bother to cheat with encumbrance - it is pointless. They will happily ignore the rule or might forget to pay attention to it but actively scheming and conniving so that they could carry an extra long sword or a bag of coins? Give me a break. From the sounds of it, encumbrance has never been mentioned by the DM in this game until a session came up where they played a PC as an NPC and looked at the character sheet. If the DM has never asked the players if they can carry something, why would the players think it matters at all?

Session 0:
DM "We are playing with encumbrance"
Players "OK"

Did the DM explain what he meant by that? What does encumbrance mean to each player? Depending on the experience of each player they could easily think that ammo costs nothing in weight (most video games it does not).

Session 1 -> NN ... Encumbrance is never mentioned. DM never asks characters if they can carry something.

Session NN: DM notes that a character sheet indicates a character is 90lbs over encumbrance and thinks everyone is cheating.

Wut? If you are going to use encumbrance then the DM has to use it to give it any meaning for either the DM or the players. If the DM is happy to ignore it in play then the players will go along.

Maybe I have misinterpreted and the DM constantly asked the individuals in the party where they were carrying that extra suit of armor, he gently reminded each player that they need to track all the things they pick up ... and the players ignored it and lied about being able to carry it ... but honestly it doesn't sound like that. If a DM wants to use encumbrance and make it have meaning then they need to use it in the game ... it isn't a side accounting thing that each player is expected to be responsible for off screen.

Anyway ...

Cheating is ... modifying die rolls ... making up fictitious abilities for your character (this one is easy to spot unless the DM is very new to the game) ... making up rules that help you (this again is a new DM problem - player says "Yes my character can concentrate on two spells at once" - Experienced DM says "No") ... the DM needs to know the rules of the game including any changes and house rules they decide to use.

Cheating is also lying ... if the players know what encumbrance is, how it is to be used in the game, the DM asks them if they have enough carrying capacity for the 1000gp they just picked up and the player, knowing that their character sheet says they are already overweight says "Sure, I can carry it" ... then they are cheating.

However, not paying attention to encumbrance when the game as played doesn't seem to use it? That is just being lazy, not usually cheating.

[Fishyninja]

Just a couple of comments ...

1) Which version of encumbrance are you using? The base strength x 15lbs or the variant?

Base Version, so yes Str x 15. It is the simplest to use and away you go. Again using Roll20 so auto calculated!



If using the base version, you only need to keep a rough track which Roll20 and most automated character sheets take care of. You only really run into trouble when the players try to carry off large numbers of coins. At least in this version 50 coins weigh about a pound but if you want to carry off 1000gp you are looking at 20 pounds and 10,000gp is 200lbs.

Yep this is the situation we are at now. In a few sessions in this dungeon they will have access to a lot of riches. So the sudden timing of 'Oh we don't want to use encumbrance' reeks a bit of players looking ahead into the module.



2) The OP said that one character was 90lbs over and most of it was due to 220 arrows - however 20 arrows is only 1lb so 220 is 11 lbs and well within the carrying capacity of most characters so there were certainly other items being carried that made the character exceed the weight limit.

You were right. I had a look and a lot of her items had actually been stored in her saddle bag and she had forgotten to tack them off.



Finally, the only way to resolve it at the table is with a bit of discussion. Some players really do not like any book keeping at all - they are there to play the game not make lists of everything they are carrying and what it weighs. On the other hand, some players love the details and others are indifferent. Since you are playing on Roll20, most of the weights are automatically added - so most of the time all a player needs to do is look at the sheet. They are already tracking encumbrance because they are using the sheet - the only factor is whether they actually look at what the number says. Since the character sheet is available to everyone, the DM can help folks pare down their inventory a bit.

However, hoarders exist in real life and D&D is no different. Some people just like to take everything they find and don't like giving it up. Other players pick up everything they find because they are used to video games which may or may not use encumbrance. Either way, some players either won't understand why D&D is different or why they might have to leave stuff that they find behind. In both of these cases, the DM needs to have a very simple chat to the group, explain the purpose and meaning of encumbrance (I suggest using only the basic rule, not the variant one), show them how easily it is reported on the character sheet and get the characters who like to collect things the opportunity to remove items from the character sheet so that their carried weight is closer to the limit. Show how the process is easy, not onerous and won't really affect their character - it only limits how much they can carry.

I think it is a hoarding issue as one of the players who has shown dissent also was getting agitated that I was going to create a Bag Of Holding sheet for them to easily track inventory and they wanted to have sole control on it.
As someone else stated, because of this I am now worried about tracking their gold usage as well.

[Morty]

I've played in several games where we didn't use encumbrance. Either because there were no rules for it to begin with or because no one cared. Two of them were D&D 5E. This worked just fine, everybody only carried what they actually needed and no one tried to abuse it. If and when we faced a problem of carrying something large, heavy or voluminous, we dealt with it as it came. Thus I'm generally of the opinion that tracking encumbrance is a waste of time.

[Fishyninja]

I've played in several games where we didn't use encumbrance. Either because there were no rules for it to begin with or because no one cared. Two of them were D&D 5E. This worked just fine, everybody only carried what they actually needed and no one tried to abuse it. If and when we faced a problem of carrying something large, heavy or voluminous, we dealt with it as it came. Thus I'm generally of the opinion that tracking encumbrance is a waste of time.

Fair enough, but what happens if some people want to track it and some don't? Do you just let the players continue that way?

[Morty]

Fair enough, but what happens if some people want to track it and some don't? Do you just let the players continue that way?

As a GM, I would probably say that I don't expect anyone to track it, but if someone wants to, they can feel free. I don't expect it would lead to any actual problems unless a player went out of the way to cause them.

[Keravath]

I think it is a hoarding issue as one of the players who has shown dissent also was getting agitated that I was going to create a Bag Of Holding sheet for them to easily track inventory and they wanted to have sole control on it.
As someone else stated, because of this I am now worried about tracking their gold usage as well.

I edited my answer above and added some stuff on the cheating question (I don't think most would intentionally cheat encumbrance).

As for gold expenditures, does it matter in your game?

For example, a character with 200gp, goes to a bar, buys a meal for 3sp and 3 ales for 15cp. That is less than 1/2 gp. It is pocket change for the character and a rounding error on their 200gp (and honestly, if you play some of the WotC content - 200gp is negligible by itself, some of the tier 1 and tier 2 adventures can yield 1000's of gp).

Some players love to track each cp spent. Others see that it is rounding error and consider it a waste of time. As a DM I will track the expensive items. A party I am running recently bought a house which cost them 3500gp. They were considering buying a ballista for their ship which would be 1000gp. I can't be bothered tracking the costs of a night at the bar - it isn't worth my time or theirs.

So, my suggestion would be let the players record their gold and only make sure that large expenditures are removed from inventory. Day to day expenses, nights out at the inn, are role playing experiences and if a player tracks the costs, great! but I am not going to turn the game into book keeping 101 and it isn't worth the time for the DM to track the small stuff.

It's just my opinion. Others will have a different take on encumbrance, coin expenses, food usage but I only tend to track these when they matter to the game play. I will track food/drink if they travel overland, somewhere where it is scarce or difficult to find, and the survival element is a part of that section of the campaign - otherwise it becomes a narrative anecdote and move on (the party spends 2 hours when making camp scrounging for food and potable water ... or the Druid/Ranger spends 6 seconds casting goodberry :) ).

[Fishyninja]

I edited my answer above and added some stuff on the cheating question (I don't think most would intentionally cheat encumbrance).

As for gold expenditures, does it matter in your game?

For example, a character with 200gp, goes to a bar, buys a meal for 3sp and 3 ales for 15cp. That is less than 1/2 gp. It is pocket change for the character and a rounding error on their 200gp (and honestly, if you play some of the WotC content - 200gp is negligible by itself, some of the tier 1 and tier 2 adventures can yield 1000's of gp).

Some players love to track each cp spent. Others see that it is rounding error and consider it a waste of time. As a DM I will track the expensive items. A party I am running recently bought a house which cost them 3500gp. They were considering buying a ballista for their ship which would be 1000gp. I can't be bothered tracking the costs of a night at the bar - it isn't worth my time or theirs.

So, my suggestion would be let the players record their gold and only make sure that large expenditures are removed from inventory. Day to day expenses, nights out at the inn, are role playing experiences and if a player tracks the costs, great! but I am not going to turn the game into book keeping 101 and it isn't worth the time for the DM to track the small stuff.

It's just my opinion. Others will have a different take on encumbrance, coin expenses, food usage but I only tend to track these when they matter to the game play. I will track food/drink if they travel overland, somewhere where it is scarce or difficult to find, and the survival element is a part of that section of the campaign - otherwise it becomes a narrative anecdote and move on (the party spends 2 hours when making camp scrounging for food and potable water ... or the Druid/Ranger spends 6 seconds casting goodberry :) ).

In regards to costs etc. Usually food and drinks I will tell them (the players the amount) and unless they state otherwise I assume they are playing but like you for large items there is a proper cost associated it. Again I have been trusting them to work out their gold themselves and to track it but because of this whole encumbrance thing I am now worried, are they knocking of the cost of items that matter like potions or scolls etc.

In regards to any excess gold and carrying it, as it is heavy. In their home city there is a bank/moneylender who can hold their gold for them and if they want, make investments as well. Only 1 player has used this feature as of yet, but they used it as they had a lot of spare cash.

[meandean]

I agree, most people do not enjoy micromanaging I know I don't.If you understand and even agree that it's not fun for players, then why are you insisting it be in your game? I mean going beyond that it's in the rules and you're the DM and it's not fair to the players who did abide by it and etc. Why is it actually preferable to have this universal rule, than to have the universal rule where there's no encumbrance?

Is it that, even though it's not fun in and of itself, you think it's nonetheless necessary bookkeeping in order to retain realism? I'm not saying that would be an illogical argument, at all... I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from. (You've said you consider it a "minor infraction", but it doesn't seem that way, to be honest.)

[Darth Credence]

I'm with everyone who has said that knowing it's a rule and ignoring it intentionally is cheating and disrespectful to the DM. That is the fundamental problem here, IMO, and needs to be addressed. I'd be tempted to reserve the first half hour to an hour of the next session to review the rules from session 0. Say something like you've found that there has been some confusion over the rules of the table, and you wanted to make sure everything was clear before moving on. Then bring this up and anything else that you can think of, and get a clear table agreement. When I am establishing rules, I generally go with a majority vote, with whatever the DM thinks winning any ties. If someone has a deal breaker, our group has always been willing to bend for that and no one has had opposing deal breakers yet. Once the rules are confirmed, before starting forward again, I'd let everyone know that there should be no more confusion over these rules, and that you will be tracking them in the future. If someone deliberately ignored the rules after that, I'd probably kick them.

In my current campaign, we nominally track endurance, but it hasn't generally been a factor. One character is an artificer who was able to make his own bag of holding, so a lot of stuff is dealt with that way. The biggest problems have been when dealing with things like art, which is bulky and heavy, so they have had to get a wagon to haul it around. But they are rapidly approaching a point where it is not going to matter, and I would assume that your players are already there. If they are getting 50k coins in a particular dungeon, then they should be level 17+, right? I think that's the only level on the standard loot tables that has that many coins, and that's only in a lair hoard. At that point, I would expect they have access to teleportation effects and can just send everything back to their home base and continue on.

[OldTrees1]

If a DM makes a rule that a player does not want to follow, there might be a disconnect. That might mean there should be a conversation.

If a DM makes a rule that a player refuses to follow, then there is a disconnect. You can accurately call that cheating, but more importantly it is a disconnect. They don't want to play with that rule and you want to play with that rule. Having a mature conversation to find an agreement is ideal. That agreement might be that you are not compatible, or one/both sides might be flexible enough to find a compromise.

[Fishyninja]

If you understand and even agree that it's not fun for players, then why are you insisting it be in your game? I mean going beyond that it's in the rules and you're the DM and it's not fair to the players who did abide by it and etc. Why is it actually preferable to have this universal rule, than to have the universal rule where there's no encumbrance?

Is it that, even though it's not fun in and of itself, you think it's nonetheless necessary bookkeeping in order to retain realism? I'm not saying that would be an illogical argument, at all... I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from. (You've said you consider it a "minor infraction", but it doesn't seem that way, to be honest.)

Ok I understand I may have been unclear. Let me try to rectify that.


I think using encumbrance is important. Not only for Roleplay but for Mechanics as well.
I understand that 'Micromanaging' can be boring - However since we are using an automated system where you just drag the item in question onto your sheet and it calculates the weight against your encumbrance, I do not consider that Micromanagement, that is just being lazy. If for example I was asking them to weigh out the feathers in their hat and the extra buttons they added onto their clothes then yeah that is an arse-ache but asking them to keep track of their gold and gear....well the items have those stats for a reason.
Some of the players do find the encumbrance rule fun and have been abiding by it. Only recently some have said they don't bother using it
This rule was established in session 0 and was agreed by the party.

[Segev]

One way to handle it is to inform the players that you, as DM, will rule on whether you feel they're encumbered or not based on your best guestimate of what you know them to have. Those who have detailed, itemized lists can challenge you on it, and those who don't can't prove they're not.

Another way to handle it would be to require them to prove that they have items in their inventories before they can use them, and ask them how they're carrying it and such. Deny them items they have not properly tracked encumbrance for as "not with them."

A third way is to require them to provide you with updated inventories any time they change things out, and at the end of each session. You can do the encumbrance calculations, yourself, and be strict about what items they're carrying. You can even be reasonable with those who can provide for you updated inventories that disagree with yours as long as they clearly show that they've properly tracked (and used the rules for) encumbrance.


The first method is the least intrusive and least like assigning homework to the players; you assume good faith on their part, but you also assume you are tracking things based on what you are aware they have. If you're wrong, they can provide their encumbrance tracking to correct you.

The last is the most formalized, which may or may not work for your group.

[Fishyninja]

I'm with everyone who has said that knowing it's a rule and ignoring it intentionally is cheating and disrespectful to the DM. That is the fundamental problem here, IMO, and needs to be addressed. I'd be tempted to reserve the first half hour to an hour of the next session to review the rules from session 0. Say something like you've found that there has been some confusion over the rules of the table, and you wanted to make sure everything was clear before moving on. Then bring this up and anything else that you can think of, and get a clear table agreement. When I am establishing rules, I generally go with a majority vote, with whatever the DM thinks winning any ties. If someone has a deal breaker, our group has always been willing to bend for that and no one has had opposing deal breakers yet. Once the rules are confirmed, before starting forward again, I'd let everyone know that there should be no more confusion over these rules, and that you will be tracking them in the future. If someone deliberately ignored the rules after that, I'd probably kick them.

In my current campaign, we nominally track endurance, but it hasn't generally been a factor. One character is an artificer who was able to make his own bag of holding, so a lot of stuff is dealt with that way. The biggest problems have been when dealing with things like art, which is bulky and heavy, so they have had to get a wagon to haul it around. But they are rapidly approaching a point where it is not going to matter, and I would assume that your players are already there. If they are getting 50k coins in a particular dungeon, then they should be level 17+, right? I think that's the only level on the standard loot tables that has that many coins, and that's only in a lair hoard. At that point, I would expect they have access to teleportation effects and can just send everything back to their home base and continue on.

This is a great answer thank you.

And for clarification I use the 50k GP as an example. They will probably be getting at least 20K GP and associated loot to make it up to 50K GP, the point is they will potentially be getting their hands on a lot of gold and items. They are in a remote location which is not easily accessed and they are not of a level where they have access to teleportation. The module that they are playing was designed as a one shot but I am incorporating it into the campaign. When I personally played this oneshot, the DM did not run encumbrance rules we had the gold and then were sort of stuck on what to do with it all. Another reason why I wanted to have the encumbrance rules. I am not worried about them crashing the economy in anyway I just want them to consider the logistics.


One way to handle it is to inform the players that you, as DM, will rule on whether you feel they're encumbered or not based on your best guestimate of what you know them to have. Those who have detailed, itemized lists can challenge you on it, and those who don't can't prove they're not.

Another way to handle it would be to require them to prove that they have items in their inventories before they can use them, and ask them how they're carrying it and such. Deny them items they have not properly tracked encumbrance for as "not with them."

A third way is to require them to provide you with updated inventories any time they change things out, and at the end of each session. You can do the encumbrance calculations, yourself, and be strict about what items they're carrying. You can even be reasonable with those who can provide for you updated inventories that disagree with yours as long as they clearly show that they've properly tracked (and used the rules for) encumbrance.


The first method is the least intrusive and least like assigning homework to the players; you assume good faith on their part, but you also assume you are tracking things based on what you are aware they have. If you're wrong, they can provide their encumbrance tracking to correct you.

The last is the most formalized, which may or may not work for your group.

I would really like to rely on good faith to them but the fact some of them have admitted to ignoring a requested rule. I am not sure if I can rely on that.

[Segev]

This is a great answer thank you.

And for clarification I use the 50k GP as an example. They will probably be getting at least 20K GP and associated loot to make it up to 50K GP, the point is they will potentially be getting their hands on a lot of gold and items. They are in a remote location which is not easily accessed and they are not of a level where they have access to teleportation. The module that they are playing was designed as a one shot but I am incorporating it into the campaign. When I personally played this oneshot, the DM did not run encumbrance rules we had the gold and then were sort of stuck on what to do with it all. Another reason why I wanted to have the encumbrance rules. I am not worried about them crashing the economy in anyway I just want them to consider the logistics.

Even if some of the party hasn't been tracking encumbrance, moments like this are perfect times for the DM to ask, "How are you transporting it?" When they explain, if you have any reason to question at all that that would work, feel free to ask, "Can you really carry all of that? What are you currently at and how much can you carry?" Everyone will have to produce their carry weights, how it's stored on them, and what their encumbrance-related values are. You need not be accusatory nor confrontational, just force them to tally up here, because it's suddenly very important.

This will either get the players who aren't tracking it to track it better, or provide you more excuses to remind them that they're encumbered and force them to prove they're not (which means tracking encumbrance).

[Fishyninja]

Even if some of the party hasn't been tracking encumbrance, moments like this are perfect times for the DM to ask, "How are you transporting it?" When they explain, if you have any reason to question at all that that would work, feel free to ask, "Can you really carry all of that? What are you currently at and how much can you carry?" Everyone will have to produce their carry weights, how it's stored on them, and what their encumbrance-related values are. You need not be accusatory nor confrontational, just force them to tally up here, because it's suddenly very important.

This will either get the players who aren't tracking it to track it better, or provide you more excuses to remind them that they're encumbered and force them to prove they're not (which means tracking encumbrance).

I usually do and I do this with most of their plans, primarily so I understand their ideas. So questions like "How are you going to do this" is common. Again referring back to OP the whole encumbrance issue came from me controlling a players character while they were away and noticing their encumbrance was off. This started the whole conversation in which some of the other players began dissenting about the encumbrance rule. Turns out that encumbered player had forgot to tick some stuff off and they are not the problem player.

[Segev]

I usually do and I do this with most of their plans, primarily so I understand their ideas. So questions like "How are you going to do this" is common. Again referring back to OP the whole encumbrance issue came from me controlling a players character while they were away and noticing their encumbrance was off. This started the whole conversation in which some of the other players began dissenting about the encumbrance rule. Turns out that encumbered player had forgot to tick some stuff off and they are not the problem player.

Just stick to your guns and insist that your game uses encumbrance. You can force the issue by demanding accountings of what player characters are carrying and where whenever you have reason to question whether they are too encumbered to do something.

[Fishyninja]

Just stick to your guns and insist that your game uses encumbrance. You can force the issue by demanding accountings of what player characters are carrying and where whenever you have reason to question whether they are too encumbered to do something.

Yeah was trying to avoid being the hard ruler on this but we'll see. It's annoying as usually this group is really good on things.

[Segev]

Yeah was trying to avoid being the hard ruler on this but we'll see. It's annoying as usually this group is really good on things.

It's a line to walk, yeah. You can just track their encumbrance, yourself, too. Not necessarily in full detail, but keeping in mind what they've said they're carrying. "Aren't you encumbered?" is probably enough to force them to at least look. If the "problem player" just says "no" no matter what, then you can ask them for an accounting of what they're carrying. "I'm not encumbered because I say so and don't want to bother with the rules" is bad faith gaming at a table where the DM has stated that encumbrance is a rule to be tracked and followed.

[Kurt Kurageous]

How can you worry about weight only when it matters if you have no idea how much burden you're already under?

True. But what you're currently carrying can change. Bars of gold in the pants of Cortez's men, ya know? Its a choice and a tradeoff made in game. Party doffs all armor and carries more vs taking what they can.

And figuring out what they can is STRx15.

Maybe a workable compromise is each player knows how much MORE they can carry without encumbrance. So when a situation arises, we can get a good idea how much.

But in general, its a tactical problem. Do we progress or do we retreat with the loot? What are the risks and rewards of each choice, and what can we do to make the odds of success be more in our favor? Then DM adjudicates.

[meandean]

"I'm the DM, and I like this rule, and I made it clear to the players that we're using it" is a perfectly consistent viewpoint. I get that.

However, if this issue is causing this much tension at your table, I think you owe it to both yourself and your players to consider why it's important to you. What gameplay or player decisions are you trying to add to the game?

Some possibilities I can think of:


You want casters to prepare utility spells.

Considering that some spells that can solve the problem are rituals, this doesn't seem like a great reason.


You want the players to spend money on mules, retainers, etc.

I... guess? Seems like it'd save a lot of time and effort to just decrease the amount of treasure in the first place.


You think it'd be interesting if players had to make tough decisions about what to keep.

Now, it feels like encumbrance should accomplish that. But if it ends up being "they ultimately do get all of the 50K gold, we just spend a half-hour discussing how", then it doesn't... right? It'd only be a real decision if you legitimately had to choose between either not taking your newfound treasure, or dropping valuable items and losing them forever.

That would be more likely to happen in a "slot"/"backpack" system, where it matters what type of item it is. If you can only carry three magic staffs and you find a fourth, you can't just drop the ball bearings you never use; you have to get rid of a magic staff. (You would, of course, then lose the advantage that Roll20 is doing the work for you.)


You don't want everyone to dump Strength.

That's actually a good reason! (Although do note that it's partially outweighed -- literally! -- by the fact that higher-STR characters are probably wearing heavier armor. So if we're talking about the ability to pick up new stuff you find, there's less difference than one might expect. Still, there is something to this for sure.)


I'd encourage you to lay out the case, so to speak. You'll either have a new perspective on how the rules should look, or you'll have well-thought-out reasons that you can present to your players explaining why the current rule adds to the game. Again, we can argue that they should just accept "because that's the rule here", and that's not wrong, but it's also probably not a fun equilibrium for anyone.

[Unoriginal]

"I'm the DM, and I like this rule, and I made it clear to the players that we're using it" is a perfectly consistent viewpoint. I get that.

However, if this issue is causing this much tension at your table, I think you owe it to both yourself and your players to consider why it's important to you. What gameplay or player decisions are you trying to add to the game?


Regardless of *why* OP wants this rule, or what the rule is, that is not the issue.


The issue is that OP made clear which rule was used, the players all agreed to it, and then some of them disrespected OP and the other players by not caring enough to play by the rules.

This is what's creating tension. OP did nothing wrong.

[Keravath]

Yeah was trying to avoid being the hard ruler on this but we'll see. It's annoying as usually this group is really good on things.

It's Roll20. The character sheets are all available to the DM. In addition, I have it set up in my games so that all the players can see each others character sheets if they want to (nothing to hide at the moment and this way they can help each other out).

This makes checking encumbrance a 2 second task (depending on Roll20 lag).

If folks are way over - find out where their stuff is being carried - is it in a backpack? On a mule? In a saddle bag? Saddlebags and other methods of transportation will probably satisfy most collectors but the player needs to realize that the character won't be able to carry around 500lbs of gear. Also, if they want to pull out some item to solve a problem or a new weapon in combat, it is similarly easy to make sure it is present on their character sheet.

I've often found that overages in encumbrance are due to not deleting items. For example, classes start with certain armor but then the character upgrades and forgets to remove the old armor. It can be very easy to go over encumbrance by simply forgetting (or not knowing how) to delete items from inventory that you aren't actually carrying around.

One more suggestion is to use the Roll20 inventory for what the character is actually carrying. Have a separate page/handout for stored items - horse/saddlebag/cart/bag of holding - unfortunately these are manual, however they are also group maintained so the player who actually doesn't mind inventory management can be designated master of loot and keep the storage updated.

[Sigreid]

I'd tell everyone in a group chat or email "Look guys, I really prefer to run a game using encumbrance. It's intergal to the way I run the game. If you're not willing to play with encumbrance this isn't a game I want to run. Doesn't mean you aren't great people that I enjoy playing with, but this is a deal breaker for me to be willing to put the time and energy into the DM role."

[Fishyninja]

It's Roll20. The character sheets are all available to the DM. In addition, I have it set up in my games so that all the players can see each others character sheets if they want to (nothing to hide at the moment and this way they can help each other out).

This makes checking encumbrance a 2 second task (depending on Roll20 lag).

If folks are way over - find out where their stuff is being carried - is it in a backpack? On a mule? In a saddle bag? Saddlebags and other methods of transportation will probably satisfy most collectors but the player needs to realize that the character won't be able to carry around 500lbs of gear. Also, if they want to pull out some item to solve a problem or a new weapon in combat, it is similarly easy to make sure it is present on their character sheet.

I've often found that overages in encumbrance are due to not deleting items. For example, classes start with certain armor but then the character upgrades and forgets to remove the old armor. It can be very easy to go over encumbrance by simply forgetting (or not knowing how) to delete items from inventory that you aren't actually carrying around.

One more suggestion is to use the Roll20 inventory for what the character is actually carrying. Have a separate page/handout for stored items - horse/saddlebag/cart/bag of holding - unfortunately these are manual, however they are also group maintained so the player who actually doesn't mind inventory management can be designated master of loot and keep the storage updated.

Someone in the this thread kindly sent me a link to some sheets like that. I have contacted the group with my decision just waiting for the responses now.

[Cass]

I think it's fair for you to use encumbrance but I think it's unfair to enforce it mid-dungeon because you didn't allow them to take it in consideration before heading out. It slipped through, move on for now and start tracking it from next time they resupply.
Personally, I would consider not counting the weight of a worn armor because it penalizes Strength characters too much and even in real life worn armor is much lighter than armor in a backpack.

[Tanarii]

I think it's fair for you to use encumbrance but I think it's unfair to enforce it mid-dungeon because you didn't allow them to take it in consideration before heading out. It slipped through, move on for now and start tracking it from next time they resupply.If it wasn't brought up as a rules exception in session 0, it's fair to enforce it at any time.

In this case, the OP has clarified that it was brought up specifically that it wasn't an exception in session 0. That's above and beyond what's required, and makes it even more fair to enforce it at any time.

[Fishyninja]

Well at present my current decisions is

I have made a macro to help me as the DM track the players encumbrance. I have also just text the entire party stating that we did all agree to use the encumbrance rules in session 0 and that I would like to continue to do that, however if they do not wish too we can have a chat about it and work out something potentially.

I have stated that if we are going to do encumbrance, if a player doesn't know the weight of something (i.e. not in the PHB) then let me know and I'll add it in after session Unless it is going to make them over encumbered in the session.

[Gorilla2038]

Encumbrance is one of those tricky rules that I've never seen much fun come from- and it tends to bring in a wierd minigame feel, of managing screens.

That being said, one of the easiest routes to bypassing it is more realistic realism- no one has ever left gold in a dungeon. They do what us old farts do- hirelings, caravans, and enough guards to fight off a small army.

If you want more realism, simply ask the party for the method they use to carry overweight stuff- wagons, horses, sleds, what have you. Then, ask for a combat loadout- the things they keep on them at all times. Modern soldiers loadouts can reach 180 pounds ( or more, if youre humping your full gear and that damn mortar baseplate), but most don't try to run around at 400 total pounds. Just pick what they have, and make the fighter pull a red rider wagon around, or create a *fun* minigame that allows for your level of fun with it.

Perhaps unhelpfully, consider that DnD, and it's baseline assumptions, make for difficult realism. Offer them the chance to do these things, and make sure if you modify it to fit there normals, agree on " ok, the gm says that's way too much stuff". If the party can loot it, assume they do, and I'd they can't, have a good reason- the ceilings falling, the dragon hoard transport is it's own quest line in which the party has to choose between helping folks and making sure they get every penny, rtc

Lastly, just consider giving loot that's smaller and more valuable. A +X sword of butt kicking is a great find in a dungeon, but less so if everyone are axe-vikings. Frankincense and myrrh. Rare components. Spices. Things that are very valuable but have to be stored properly, allowing inventory management realism in a way that's more interesting than numbers. Create interactions with those numbers, reward intelligent thinking, possibly even consider an environment where loot is more fluid- lost and destroyed, has to be sold, etc. Boom and bust cycles are fun, but even smaller things, the feeling that you have to *protect* loot, thats different and very important.

Cheers.

[greenstone]

When I see people claiming that adding and subtracting numbers on a character sheet is "too hard" or "unnecessary", I wonder how diligently they are tracking other things that involve adding and subtracting numbers on the character sheet; namely experience and hit points.

Or to put it bluntly, if you're not tracking encumbrance correctly then how can I trust that you are tracking hit points correctly?

Adding treasure to a character sheet and "forgetting" to update encumbrance doesn't seem much different to taking damage and "forgetting" to update hit points. Then again, I have a suspicious mind. :smallbiggrin:

I am a big fan of meaningful choices. If you choose to put 8 in STR then that choice should have a conseqence (not being able to carry much loot).

[Avonar]

Well at present my current decisions is

I have made a macro to help me as the DM track the players encumbrance. I have also just text the entire party stating that we did all agree to use the encumbrance rules in session 0 and that I would like to continue to do that, however if they do not wish too we can have a chat about it and work out something potentially.

I have stated that if we are going to do encumbrance, if a player doesn't know the weight of something (i.e. not in the PHB) then let me know and I'll add it in after session Unless it is going to make them over encumbered in the session.

I think this is the best way to do it.

You seem to like this group. That's the most important thing here. I wouldn't think it's worth risk people becoming unhappy with the group for the sake of a relatively minor rule such as encumbrance, regardless of who is in the right (and for the record, if you told them from the start and reiterated it throughout, then I don't think you've done anything wrong).

Another potential suggestion would be to allow it for this dungeon, since getting people to dump a bunch of their items in the middle of a dungeon probably leaves a feel bad taste, and press for it once they are done.

[Gorilla2038]

Or to put it bluntly, if you're not tracking encumbrance correctly then how can I trust that you are tracking hit points correctly?



Well, you can't. If you're the rare person who's never added a +1 to a roll, took 1 less HP that kept you standing, kept 1 extra Mana in that final boss battle.... actually, that's rad and you're probably a really good person, so serious props on that. But I guarantee you the only other person at the table who can say the same is the new guy you made be the cleric.

But the real reason they're different is simple- value and cost in gameplay. Outside of dramatic gameplay, encumbrance rules have no interactions or game purpose. They have very few rules that interact with them, they somewhat contradict one of the core cultural tenants of DnD (woot loot and if it's nailed down, we all brought crowbars) that's reinforced by mechanics ( to paraphrase Vin Diesel, what am I doing with a rusty shortsword? I slay the orcs and take their stuff).

While characters are defined by items, it's not their weight interactions, something small and out of sync with High Fantasy as a High Concept. Rand Al'Thor and Kaladin fight to the death, no one's asking if either is over weight, took their vitamin supplements, maintained a regular training pattern, or made sure they were carrying light loads.

Hit points, in addition to honestly being closer to "cheating" or at least unsportsmanlike conduct, have multiple rule interactions (leveling, abilities, enemy to hit, healing), a constant source of personal interaction, and directly affect the plot, flow, and your fellow players actions, as well as your own.

Which isn't to say that you're wrong for liking those rules! Buy I'm willing to bet a shiny nickel that a poll would say that 70+% don't track encumbrance, and considering I've never heard of this argument outside DnD (but several times related to DnD), I'd bet that number is closer to 80% in other rpgs. The answer is simply because it's make work, it's never really important outside of some very rare situations (most of the ones coming to mind have more dramatic weight than physical for not taking the silverware), and it doesn't help the story.

So I guess really what I'd say is trust is about context. If your buddies don't want to hang out with the girl who've been seeing but don't know her last name, that's one thing. If your buddies don't want to hang out with your wife, that's a different trust issue.

PS, If you do have any encumbrance based encounters or interactions that are neat, I'd love to here them. I really like the idea of " it's too heavy to lift" as the main reason you lose a fight.

[Jerrykhor]

This is what Bag of Holding is for - lazies who hate tracking encumbrance. I'll be honest, i dont like tracking rations and ammo. Feels too much like like bean counting, and its not fun. Plus, after a certain level, you have so much gold that these things cost an insignificant amount of money anyway. 5e likes to do a lot of assumptions too, such as assuming the adventurers maintain their equipment during rests, thats why theres no durability mechanics for gear right? So why cant they assume i forage for food and stock up on ammo whenever possible too? I dont mind tracking rations when I am a low level, poor adventurer just starting out with nothing but basic equipment, but once you established yourself as reknowned heroes, having to worry about whether you have enough food to eat is laughable. Bag of Holding is there so that we can ignore these bothersome mechanics and focus on playing game - the stuff that is fun, not the dry stuff. You know, the whole point of playing the game. Fun. Never forget that. And you are a DM, not a school teacher.

Encumbrance rules is not a hill worth dying on. Realism is overrated anyway. Is HP realistic?

[Willie the Duck]

When I see people claiming that adding and subtracting numbers on a character sheet is "too hard" or "unnecessary", I wonder how diligently they are tracking other things that involve adding and subtracting numbers on the character sheet; namely experience and hit points.

Or to put it bluntly, if you're not tracking encumbrance correctly then how can I trust that you are tracking hit points correctly?
I don't find this particularly convincing. It seems that the #1 reason that people are mildly rebelling against the encumbrance tracking is that they don't see the value in it. Anyone who has played the game knows darn well that an inaccurate HP tally will effect the gameplay.

That's really where I'm diverging from the OP in general where otherwise we agree-- yes, if the DM requests that people adhere to rule XYZ then the players should either do so or stop gameplay and start a discussing/negotiating/arguing cycle and resolve the difference in gameplay desires rather than just soft rebelling, however I am not getting the impression that they are trying to 'get away with something.' It seems to me more that they feel encumbrance tracking is busywork, and to be honest, the modern game conspires to instill that impression. Back when encumbrance was measured in 'coins(cn)' and experience points were measured in GP worth of treasure dragged back to town, there was an obvious line between encumbrance space used and XP opportunities lost*. Nowadays, with heavier armor not always being better (except for the weight), builds solidifying such that you won't be switching between many weapons (no WvsAC chart, etc.), and it being hard enough to make GP past a certain point seem interesting, I get why someone might not see the value in diligently engaging the encumbrance system.
*Although it should be noted that even in the oD&D days, 5% of all miscellaneous magic items were bags of holding which could hold a half ton, meaning that the 'difficult decisions and careful weighing of opportunity costs' was a low-level thing you quickly outgrew as you progressed, pointing out that it was always considered somewhat tedious.

To be clear, I love the idea of mundane constraints and having to balance difficult choices. I wish this edition did more to engage in the mundane/exploration pillar/ weighing of options part of the game. My last adventure I had the players trying to figure out how to get their horse and wagon across a river after the ford had been washed away and everyone found it incredibly engaging. However, I don't think the game makes it obvious, particularly to players who didn't experience previous versions of the game, exactly why that part of the game would be exciting or an interesting challenge. I think that's where the DM needs to step in -- not as an enforcer looking for cheaters and malfeasance to stamp out -- but as a promoter and pitchman, selling the notion of the value of this portion of the game.

[Pex]

Potentially. In all honesty I think the 5E Encumbrance method is fine, people are just being picky about going:

"Well I picked up 10 items this session, you expect me to look into the PHB to find the weights?!"

Which Roll20 does for you anyway.

I agree with them in the sense that 'most' times encumbrance does not really matter but if you have a party who are say at 99% capacity, and they find a crap ton of gold (tens of thousands of pieces) then suddenly it becomes important because they physically cannot carry all of it. Again with my example of the bag of holding, it has a weight limit which has consequences.

It seems to me that some of the players want a game without consequence and to me that sort of removes the point of D&D

That is where encumbrance becomes the least fun, more than tedious bookkeeping. It's not about consequences. It's a richard move to give out all this treasure but then go nyah nyah you can't have it because of encumbrance. If you do take it you have to lose what you took earlier or some useful equipment. It's the DM pulling chains. There is common sense dealing with bulk. You cannot hold 10 suits of plate mail even if you don't use encumbrance, but the DM is giving the players the middle finger to offer treasure they can't have. Do this and the players will hate encumbrance more, making the game unfun.

To make encumbrance fun it should not be tedious bookkeeping of everything they carry at what specific location down to the ounce and copper piece value. The bad guys have to be affected too somehow. They need their own pack mule or cart the party can take with them after the battle. They need to be slowed down such that even if given a few days head start the party catches up with them in less time precisely because the party moves faster. The party cannot be constantly losing their own horses, pack mules, and carts, thus their stuff, due to the weather, terrain they can't cross with them, thieves, or errant magical effects of battle. Do not make encumbrance feel like a chore or punishment.

[Asisreo1]

Also, in case some forget, space is also a thing with carrying stuff. You can't carry a chest full of gold and a Large Ball of Iron without somewhere that can take them and they both fit.

There's usually not any rigorous way to calculate the space something occupies but it should go without saying that a barrel can't fit in a player's backpack and a gallon of water doesn't stay in a backpack.

[Zhorn]

bah, you young folks having been spoiled with your digital currencies, and your virtual loot, and cloud based libraries.
back in my day, equipment, loot and resources were heavy, and you could only carry so much.
Where dumbing stats has serious consequences, where having enough torches to see in the lower dungeon levels was a serious concern, and starvation was a legitimate hazard.

To be honest I don't really care for the whole "encumbrance is just tracking numbers and therefore is not fun and should be ignored" arguments. It's like the folks leaning on that have no idea what game they're playing. ALL of d&d's rules are math wearing the disguise of imagination. Don't like math and tracking numbers, play another system, there are plenty out there that don't need numbers and are entirely narrative games.
HP
gold pieces
ammunition
spell slots
if you don't want to track one, why bother tracking any. And if you don't want to track any, just play something else. D&D doesn't own the concept of roleplay.

[Sol0botmate]

I get you, but the problem is I have some players happy to do so, and some who are not, even though I have asked as the DM for them to use Encumbrance. I really don't want to get into a huge disagreement with them over this but I cannot be running rules differently between the party members.

So where is the problem? You have one group that wants to do it and one that does not. So go with Encumbrance rules with one that want it and forgo it with others that do not. What's the issue? You really want to make a dispute/argument about something as trivial as Encumbrance?

For the reference I ignore it, my DMs ignore it and I met only one DM ever that was not ignoring it but gave up in the middle of campaign because people just didn't do it anyway because it's boring or they simply were forgetting it anyway because it's so.... well, boring.

Listen, it's not like someone wants to be able to concentrate on two different spells. If your WHOLE group does not want to use it- just agree with them. If 4 or 5 people don't want to do it, and 1 does - you want 5 to have less fun because of 1 person or 5 having more fun by making 1 slightly having less fun. It's not a big deal. We as DMs don't go there to force everyone to play only as we see it. Players are also adults who prefer some things or not. The most important thing as DM is make players have fun. You are there for them to see that you made them have fun and played awesome session.

There is no compromise here other than that because mechanic is simple - you either calculate it or not.

I hate and never care about encumberence becaue there are way more important things in RPG to focus on than that.

It's so trivial that it could not really exist in DnD at all.

[OldTrees1]

bah, you young folks having been spoiled with your digital currencies, and your virtual loot, and cloud based libraries.
back in my day, equipment, loot and resources were heavy, and you could only carry so much.
Where dumbing stats has serious consequences, where having enough torches to see in the lower dungeon levels was a serious concern, and starvation was a legitimate hazard.

To be honest I don't really care for the whole "encumbrance is just tracking numbers and therefore is not fun and should be ignored" arguments. It's like the folks leaning on that have no idea what game they're playing. ALL of d&d's rules are math wearing the disguise of imagination. Don't like math and tracking numbers, play another system, there are plenty out there that don't need numbers and are entirely narrative games.
HP
gold pieces
ammunition
spell slots
if you don't want to track one, why bother tracking any. And if you don't want to track any, just play something else. D&D doesn't own the concept of roleplay.

All of D&D's rules are math wearing the disguise of imagination. That is true. However, is D&D a popular form of recreational math, OR is the D&D math a means to an end?

Personally, despite loving recreational math like Mathologer, Stand-up Maths, or 3 blue 1 brown, I don't see D&D as filling that role. Almost all of D&D's math is boring math. So that means the D&D math is a cost we pay for some other benefit (albeit benefits derived from and supported by the math).

So if the math is a means to some other end, it is possible that the return on investment is different in various areas of D&D. Knowing the size of a fireball takes very little math but means your PC is not incinerating their allies. That is quite an efficient ratio. Encumbrance, when relevant, is adding 30-70 numbers together and in exchange you get to know how your character can move and who they can save when you are retreating. That is a much less efficient ratio.

Now I actually like encumbrance because it helps set a limit to how prepared my characters can be. That lets me decide on a finalized kit rather than an open ended quest to carry everything they need (What do you mean a kitchen sink will never be needed? How do you know?). Since I use encumbrance, I know it is much more math intensive and inefficient than other areas of D&D. That helps me understand groups that collectively decide to not use encumbrance.

But I would be remiss if I did not point out yet another detail. I don't see encumbrance as "just tracking numbers" because I found something in it that is more than just tracking numbers. I valued how encumbrance lets me finalize a kit. Without something valuable at the end of the busywork, it is just tracking numbers and it is pointless.

Hopefully those 2 points clarified possible contexts for those arguments.

[Fishyninja]

To make encumbrance fun it should not be tedious bookkeeping of everything they carry at what specific location down to the ounce and copper piece value. The bad guys have to be affected too somehow. They need their own pack mule or cart the party can take with them after the battle. They need to be slowed down such that even if given a few days head start the party catches up with them in less time precisely because the party moves faster. The party cannot be constantly losing their own horses, pack mules, and carts, thus their stuff, due to the weather, terrain they can't cross with them, thieves, or errant magical effects of battle. Do not make encumbrance feel like a chore or punishment.

This, I get. and this is how I try and run my games, and the players do this as well, as soon as they could they all bought Horses and one of them has a cart. This was back when they were level 2 and they are now level 10, so they are used to packing for trips etc. I think the issue is that they could not bring horses or carts with them to this dungeon, so they are having to walk and due to the position of the dungeon its not an easy trip.

I don't want it to feel like a punishment but I also do not want to be in a situation where (and please note that this is probably an exaggerated example) because players have been under the assumption we are not using that when I try to enforce it they see it as a punishment. I mean this is not actually an exaggerated example.


So where is the problem? You have one group that wants to do it and one that does not. So go with Encumbrance rules with one that want it and forgo it with others that do not. What's the issue? You really want to make a dispute/argument about something as trivial as Encumbrance?

Because you are running 2 different rule sets for the group on something which should be universal.



Listen, it's not like someone wants to be able to concentrate on two different spells.

No, but I have had some people in this group (who are also dissenting the encumbrance rule) say that they should be able to do things such as that or cast two leveled spells without Quickened Spell etc.



If your WHOLE group does not want to use it- just agree with them. If 4 or 5 people don't want to do it, and 1 does - you want 5 to have less fun because of 1 person or 5 having more fun by making 1 slightly having less fun. It's not a big deal. We as DMs don't go there to force everyone to play only as we see it. Players are also adults who prefer some things or not. The most important thing as DM is make players have fun. You are there for them to see that you made them have fun and played awesome session.

I am just asking them to stick to a rule that we all agreed to in session 0, yes they are adults and yes we are there for fun. I understand all that and preferences are fine, but they have actively agreed to a rule set out in session 0 and are now choosing to ignore it. Which in turn is causing stress in the group and for me as well. I could just throw out the encumbrance ruling sure........but the majority of the people who play do use it and enjoy it.


There is no compromise here other than that because mechanic is simple - you either calculate it or not.

I agree, the mechanics are simple and I have asked them to calculate which they supposedly have been fine to do for nearly a year or so but suddenly when a large amount of gold may potentially up for grabs...........they do not want to calculate it anymore.....


It's so trivial that it could not really exist in DnD at all.

Maybe, Maybe not I don't think it is a trivial rule but I can understand why a lot of people think it is.

[Pandamonium]

I am just asking them to stick to a rule that we all agreed to in session 0, yes they are adults and yes we are there for fun. I understand all that and preferences are fine, but they have actively agreed to a rule set out in session 0 and are now choosing to ignore it. Which in turn is causing stress in the group and for me as well. I could just throw out the encumbrance ruling sure........but the majority of the people who play do use it and enjoy it.


I super agree with that you are right to hold them to what was afreed in session 0. They are adults and not wanting to follow the rules is childish.

I don't think you should back down, yes the job as a DM is for the players to have fun but not at the expense of your own, It is your game and if they don't want to play your game I don't think you have to give up on what you see an integral mechanic, there are more tables and more players.

[diplomancer]

This, I get. and this is how I try and run my games, and the players do this as well, as soon as they could they all bought Horses and one of them has a cart. This was back when they were level 2 and they are now level 10, so they are used to packing for trips etc. I think the issue is that they could not bring horses or carts with them to this dungeon, so they are having to walk and due to the position of the dungeon its not an easy trip.

I don't want it to feel like a punishment but I also do not want to be in a situation where (and please note that this is probably an exaggerated example) because players have been under the assumption we are not using that when I try to enforce it they see it as a punishment. I mean this is not actually an exaggerated example.



Because you are running 2 different rule sets for the group on something which should be universal.



No, but I have had some people in this group (who are also dissenting the encumbrance rule) say that they should be able to do things such as that or cast two leveled spells without Quickened Spell etc.



I am just asking them to stick to a rule that we all agreed to in session 0, yes they are adults and yes we are there for fun. I understand all that and preferences are fine, but they have actively agreed to a rule set out in session 0 and are now choosing to ignore it. Which in turn is causing stress in the group and for me as well. I could just throw out the encumbrance ruling sure........but the majority of the people who play do use it and enjoy it.



I agree, the mechanics are simple and I have asked them to calculate which they supposedly have been fine to do for nearly a year or so but suddenly when a large amount of gold may potentially up for grabs...........they do not want to calculate it anymore.....



Maybe, Maybe not I don't think it is a trivial rule but I can understand why a lot of people think it is.

I'm neutral on Encumbrance, if my DM wants it I'll use it, if he doesn't care except at the extremes I'll be happier. If I'm the DM, the rule exists, but in a Schrödinger way.

That said, some of your players ARE annoying cheaters, stop playing with them, they probably cheat even more than you think. For instance, if you are not playing in a platform with a fully automated comvat tracker, they are probably cheating on HPs, Magic Item charges, and Ammo (such boring things to track!) Concentrating on 2 spells means that no sane person will play a pure martial, and if they DO they will feel useless. Casting 2 leveled spells is illegal even with Quickened spell; only way to do it is with Action Surge.

Don't be afraid to let them go; DMs are far more rare than players, they can be easily replaced. Consider how much energy you are spending on them just here and make room for more positive, less argumentative, players.

[Pelle]

I am just asking them to stick to a rule that we all agreed to in session 0, yes they are adults and yes we are there for fun. I understand all that and preferences are fine, but they have actively agreed to a rule set out in session 0 and are now choosing to ignore it. Which in turn is causing stress in the group and for me as well. I could just throw out the encumbrance ruling sure........but the majority of the people who play do use it and enjoy it.


You will most likely have more success convincing them if you explain why you want to use the rule, instead of referring to them agreeing in session 0 and saying that you want to follow a rule because you want to follow the rule.

And if you have been playing for a year and it is first now that encumbrance has mattered, the players are correct in that it is generally pointless to track it (in this campaign). Perhaps tracking encumbrance mean that they can carry 20 arrows less. However, if the number of arrows they have dont matter, then there are still no real consequences or meaningful choices to be made.

[Unoriginal]

You will most likely have more success convincing them if you explain why you want to use the rule, instead of referring to them agreeing in session 0 and saying that you want to follow a rule because you want to follow the rule.

You shouldn't have to convince people to do what they've agreed to do. Especially when they've been blatantly disrespecting you.

[Fishyninja]

I'm neutral on Encumbrance, if my DM wants it I'll use it, if he doesn't care except at the extremes I'll be happier. If I'm the DM, the rule exists, but in a Schrödinger way.

That said, some of your players ARE annoying cheaters, stop playing with them, they probably cheat even more than you think. For instance, if you are not playing in a platform with a fully automated comvat tracker, they are probably cheating on HPs, Magic Item charges, and Ammo (such boring things to track!) Concentrating on 2 spells means that no sane person will play a pure martial, and if they DO they will feel useless. Casting 2 leveled spells is illegal even with Quickened spell; only way to do it is with Action Surge.

Don't be afraid to let them go; DMs are far more rare than players, they can be easily replaced. Consider how much energy you are spending on them just here and make room for more positive, less argumentative, players.

This has been part of my concern and now because of this I am thinking, 'Are they tracking gold and items correctly, what about HP and spell slots?'


You will most likely have more success convincing them if you explain why you want to use the rule, instead of referring to them agreeing in session 0 and saying that you want to follow a rule because you want to follow the rule.

Well, we all agreed to it so we should all want to follow the rule, if they didn't want to them things should have been said. Again people change their minds on things but it should have been brought up rather than being ignored.

Also I have discussed the whys as well. I didn't put this in the OP originally because I was trying to avoid a huge wall of text.
My reasons why I like Encumbrance:

- Has applications in game more than just inventory management such as the carrying of wounded comrades or captured enemies
- Makes players think about their resources and what is needed for the mission ahead.
- Allows for creative thinking to logistics problems, even if that thinking is as simple as using Mage Hand or Unseen Servant.
- Generates Choices which have risks and conflicts, which makes the choices more meaningful.

Yes I get that most people don't follow encumbrance and in all honesty most of the time it rarely comes up as a rule but for me, its that choice it gives players, that allows for growth and progression.

Lets take the example of carrying a downed friend out of combat, lets assume that you cant heal them up and get them in the fight. What do you do? You can drag them at half speed which is an option. Or you can carry them and the 100 odd lbs of gear they are carrying which will change how you can operate mechanically. So do you take the risk of potential reduced movement by carrying them with gear, or start shedding their gear or yours?

This is just an example and I am not saying you cannot play D&D without encumbrance. You can I just feel it has an important role to play.

[Pelle]

My reasons why I like Encumbrance:

- Has applications in game more than just inventory management such as the carrying of wounded comrades or captured enemies
- Makes players think about their resources and what is needed for the mission ahead.
- Allows for creative thinking to logistics problems, even if that thinking is as simple as using Mage Hand or Unseen Servant.
- Generates Choices which have risks and conflicts, which makes the choices more meaningful.


Those are all well and good, but it sounds like situations like that haven't come up until after playing for a year. So either make sure they come up more often, or highlight and make a point of it if they actually do.

[MoiMagnus]

You shouldn't have to convince people to do what they've agreed to do.

And they shouldn't have said they agreed to do something they were not convinced to. They have definitely a big part of responsibility in this problem, and in an ideal world they should be the one realising that there is a problem and being the proactive in the resolution.

But if the goal is to mend the relationship, and not just obtain them to reluctantly keep track of encumbrance, starting on new fresh basis by clearing up misunderstanding is always better than calling up to "do what you agreed to do".

I mean, reluctant players can be fine for short campaigns. But it's never fun to have at your table players being obviously reluctant to a part of the game because they are convinced this is a frustrating part.

[Unoriginal]

And they shouldn't have said they agreed to do something they were not convinced to. They have definitely a big part of responsibility in this problem, and in an ideal world they should be the one realising that there is a problem and being the proactive in the resolution.

They're the only ones with a part of responsibility in this problem.



But if the goal is to mend the relationship, and not just obtain them to reluctantly keep track of encumbrance, starting on new fresh basis by clearing up misunderstanding is always better than calling up to "do what you agreed to do".

I mean, reluctant players can be fine for short campaigns. But it's never fun to have at your table players being obviously reluctant to a part of the game because they are convinced this is a frustrating part.

Personally I would start on new fresh bases by removing the problem players unless they make a genuine effort to apologize, and *then* we can discuss the rules again if I still want to play with them.

OP is more magnanimous than I, and there is nothing wrong with that, but the conversation shouldn't be "well, you should try X to appease the people who've been treating you badly".



So where is the problem? You have one group that wants to do it and one that does not. So go with Encumbrance rules with one that want it and forgo it with others that do not. What's the issue? You really want to make a dispute/argument about something as trivial as Encumbrance?

The problem/issue/argument isn't about Encumbrance, it's about the very non-trivial lack of respect for their fellow tablegoers and DM one has to have to ignore a rule on purpose when it suits them.

[Rynjin]

Lemme put the situation to you this way.

You played for multiple sessions without even noticing that your players were tracking encumbrance. That is the clearest indicator I can think of that the actual impact on your game is precisely zero. What's more, you were presumably happy with your situation.

You are currently unhappy. You have made yourself unhappy by realization that a rule you weren't actually doing anything with anyway is not being used properly by some players.

You are spreading that unhappiness to those players, where before they were happy. You are keeping the situation of the other half of players exactly the same; they seem to be completely neutral on the subject.

The simple solution here is...make yourself and half the players happy again. You were clearly and demonstrably more satisfied with your gaming experience by not running encumbrance, as were two other people.

You're basically just riled up over the principle of the thing, by my read. That never makes anyone happy.

Let it go.

[Unoriginal]

Lemme put the situation to you this way.

You played for multiple sessions without even noticing that your players were tracking encumbrance. That is the clearest indicator I can think of that the actual impact on your game is precisely zero. What's more, you were presumably happy with your situation.

You are currently unhappy. You have made yourself unhappy by realization that a rule you weren't actually doing anything with anyway is not being used properly by some players.

You are spreading that unhappiness to those players, where before they were happy. You are keeping the situation of the other half of players exactly the same; they seem to be completely neutral on the subject.

The simple solution here is...make yourself and half the players happy again. You were clearly and demonstrably more satisfied with your gaming experience by not running encumbrance, as were two other people.

You're basically just riled up over the principle of the thing, by my read. That never makes anyone happy.

Let it go.


"Lemme put the situation to you this way.

You played for multiple sessions without even noticing that your players were cheating. That is the clearest indicator I can think of that the actual impact on your game is precisely zero. What's more, you were presumably happy with your situation.

You are currently unhappy. You have made yourself unhappy by realization that a rule everyone agreed to use is not being used properly by some players.

You are spreading that unhappiness to those players, where before they were happy. You are keeping the situation of the other half of players exactly the same; they seem to be actually playing by the rules.

The simple solution here is...make yourself and half the players happy again. You were clearly and demonstrably more satisfied with your gaming experience by not being aware of the fact players were cheating and disrespecting you, as were two other people.

You're basically just riled up over the principle of the thing, by my read. That never makes anyone happy.

Let it go."

I wonder in what other occasions you're advocating to "let it go".

Players don't count the gold they spend, let it go?

Players doesn't subtract damages to their PCs' HPs correctly, let it go?

Queen has problems controlling the ice powers she's been suppressing her whole life, let it go?

Also:



You're basically just riled up over the principle of the thing, by my read. That never makes anyone happy.

Let it go.

By that logic, if you find out your long-term partner with whom you've agreed have an exclusive relationship has been sleeping with someone else, you should just accept it unless you were harmed physically or in another tangible fashion (ex: lost money, etc) because otherwise it's just being "riled up over the principle of the thing".

[diplomancer]

How this conversation would go if encumbrance had just been an ignored part of the game so far AND the players you mention were not cheaters:
DM- Hey guys, are you all still tracking your encumbrance?
Players- Gee, it's been so long since last I tracked, let me check it.

Then, realizing they were overboard, there'd be a frank and fruitful conversation between DM and players to resolve the immediate situation, maybe even with some backtracking to buy another cart, for instance, and then the game would proceed as normal with no further hiccups.

Sadly, that's not the case here

[Unoriginal]

How this conversation would go if encumbrance had just been an ignored part of the game so far AND the players you mention were not cheaters:
DM- Hey guys, are you all still tracking your encumbrance?
Players- Gee, it's been so long since last I tracked, let me check it.

Then, realizing they were overboard, there'd be a frank and fruitful conversation between DM and players to resolve the immediate situation, maybe even with some backtracking to buy another cart, for instance, and then the game would proceed as normal with no further hiccups.

Sadly, that's not the case here

How this conversation would go if it had been something people cared about more than encumbrance.

[Tanarii]

Those are all well and good, but it sounds like situations like that haven't come up until after playing for a year. So either make sure they come up more often, or highlight and make a point of it if they actually do.
It sounds like the situations hasn't arose after playing for a year because they intentionally weren't tracking encumberance.

[Fishyninja]

So from looking at the responses it seems a fairly even split between:

- Its not a big deal, just don't bother with Encumbrance

and

- You asked them to do something and they haven't this needs to be sorted.

Now maybe the argument I am going to propose is exaggerated, but if we throw out an established rule like encumbrance because its boring to track, why not throw out HP, because you have to track that, or class resources and spell slots? You know what lets get rid of DC's as well?

I am intentionally being sarcastic to make a point. It may seem like a minor thing, but it is important to some of the players in the group and to me.
Is it wrong to feel upset and concerned that something I have asked my players to do is being ignored by some?

[KorvinStarmast]

It's not a question of the Encumbrance rules, it's a question of you telling your players a rule, your players nodding and then saying "yeah, I'm not doing that." Yeah, a social contract issue.

If they don't respect you by refusing to follow a rule, there's no reason they'd respect you for anything else. I, generally, dispute the "it's too hard" to add and subtract argument.

Everyone, including the DM. Being disrespected is not fun. DMs are allowed to have fun too.

When I see people claiming that adding and subtracting numbers on a character sheet is "too hard" or "unnecessary", I wonder how diligently they are tracking other things that involve adding and subtracting numbers on the character sheet; namely experience and hit points. I have a similar problem with players failing to track their hit dice for healing. It's not that hard.

I am a big fan of meaningful choices. If you choose to put 8 in STR then that choice should have a conseqence (not being able to carry much loot).Bingo.

That is where encumbrance becomes the least fun, more than tedious bookkeeping. It's not about consequences. It's a richard move to give out all this treasure but then go nyah nyah you can't have it because of encumbrance. The decision point comes: do we mind moving a bit more slowly, and still carry all of those copper and silver coins, or do we need to be able to move at our normal rate and leave the least valuable coins behind. But one thing I have done more of, lately, as a DM, is rather than piles of coins like copper and silver I'll convert them into low cost jewelry or 'silver plated goblet' of that value or "a beautifully made electrum ring worth (a few GP or a few hundred copper pieces). The only mosters I have sitting on piles of coins are dragons, due to tradition, and a few humanoid NPCs. The other kinds of treasure tend to be earrings, neclaces, arm bands, rings, etc.
Or, in a few of the bandit hoards: bottles of perfume, bolts of silk, barrels of whisky, etc.

[Tanarii]

That is where encumbrance becomes the least fun, more than tedious bookkeeping. It's not about consequences. It's a richard move to give out all this treasure but then go nyah nyah you can't have it because of encumbrance.



The decision point comes: do we mind moving a bit more slowly, and still carry all of those copper and silver coins, or do we need to be able to move at our normal rate and leave the least valuable coins behind. But one thing I have done more of, lately, as a DM, is rather than piles of coins like copper and silver I'll convert them into low cost jewelry or 'silver plated goblet' of that value or "a beautifully made electrum ring worth (a few GP or a few hundred copper pieces). The only mosters I have sitting on piles of coins are dragons, due to tradition, and a few humanoid NPCs. The other kinds of treasure tend to be earrings, neclaces, arm bands, rings, etc.
Or, in a few of the bandit hoards: bottles of perfume, bolts of silk, barrels of whisky, etc.
Right. Pex I've seen you make this claim before, but it's only the case that it's not about consequences (and by implication interesting decisions) if the players have all the time in the world and no danger nearby. Otherwise, it's exactly about interesting decisions and consequences.

Especially in a save the world type scenario. "Do the plucky heroes doom the world by giving in to the lure of riches?"

[Fishyninja]

That is where encumbrance becomes the least fun, more than tedious bookkeeping. It's not about consequences. It's a richard move to give out all this treasure but then go nyah nyah you can't have it because of encumbrance.

Interesting choices and consequences. Risk and Conflict

It's a common trope in movies for adventurers to find a hoard of treasure, or even one item. Usually followed by the treasure room collapsing leaving the group with the choices of running, running with some items, or staying and dying with the hoard.

It's about that choice for the player. I am not actively denying them treasure, if they find a hoard they can take it but its not going to be a simple case of picking it all up and walking out with it. The choice becomes part of the game, do they hire people to collect it and risk thieves? Do multiple trips with horses and carts and try to fend off potential bandits? Take what they can carry and mark the location for later?

If we ignored encumbrance........that goes away.

[Segev]

That is where encumbrance becomes the least fun, more than tedious bookkeeping. It's not about consequences. It's a richard move to give out all this treasure but then go nyah nyah you can't have it because of encumbrance. If you do take it you have to lose what you took earlier or some useful equipment. It's the DM pulling chains. There is common sense dealing with bulk. You cannot hold 10 suits of plate mail even if you don't use encumbrance, but the DM is giving the players the middle finger to offer treasure they can't have. Do this and the players will hate encumbrance more, making the game unfun.

To make encumbrance fun it should not be tedious bookkeeping of everything they carry at what specific location down to the ounce and copper piece value. The bad guys have to be affected too somehow. They need their own pack mule or cart the party can take with them after the battle. They need to be slowed down such that even if given a few days head start the party catches up with them in less time precisely because the party moves faster. The party cannot be constantly losing their own horses, pack mules, and carts, thus their stuff, due to the weather, terrain they can't cross with them, thieves, or errant magical effects of battle. Do not make encumbrance feel like a chore or punishment.

It's not a mean trick of taunting with loot they can't carry. The players - and thus their characters - know that carrying large amounts of stuff is going to be taxing. Old school D&D had the adventuring party be the leaders of entire expeditions of hirelings and henchmen who would run pack animals and wagons, maintain a camp, and even defend it (so watch order was less important, but trustworthiness and rations for the expedition was moreso). They can buy wagons and pack animals, hire porters and drovers, etc., and obviate a lot of the problems of encumbrance...but now they have other logistical concerns.

I do agree that it needs to do more for the game. There really need to be more solid hex crawling (outdoor/overworld exploration) rules and more solid dungeon crawling rules. Old school D&D had "turns" that were ten minutes long and in which the party could take particular actions as a whole (https://oldschoolessentials.necroticgnome.com/srd/index.php/Dungeon_Adventuring), which made movement speed slow - glacial - in a dungeon unless the party wasn't going to look for any traps or secret doors. But it also gave structure to that part of the adventure, and made there be rules. There are spells that interact with this part of it, and a few items, but imagine of class features and spells had a formal "dungeon crawl" and "hex crawl" pair of subsystems to directly interact with. Imagine if these subsystems had gotten as much development, elaboration, and streamlining as the combat (or even the skill) subsystems over the last 30 years. (Yes, 30: I believe 1e AD&D is when the game stopped suggesting formal rules for dungeon crawling, as I haven't seen those rules outside of pre-AD&D stuff.)

That said, even with what we do have, encumbrance forces choices and planning. It's not "oh, haha, look at all this loot you can't carry." It's, "How do we protect our caravan, feed our hirelings, and get our wagons through here?"

[Xervous]

Interesting choices and consequences. Risk and Conflict

It's a common trope in movies for adventurers to find a hoard of treasure, or even one item. Usually followed by the treasure room collapsing leaving the group with the choices of running, running with some items, or staying and dying with the hoard.

It's about that choice for the player. I am not actively denying them treasure, if they find a hoard they can take it but its not going to be a simple case of picking it all up and walking out with it. The choice becomes part of the game, do they hire people to collect it and risk thieves? Do multiple trips with horses and carts and try to fend off potential bandits? Take what they can carry and mark the location for later?

If we ignored encumbrance........that goes away.

The overarching question is if the players actually want that out of the game. A survival game has a very focused concept and audience. D&D not so much.

It's, "How do we protect our caravan, feed our hirelings, and get our wagons through here?"
Not everyone drawn to D&D wants to play Ledgers and Luggage.

[Zhorn]

Don't forget Tenser's Floating Disc
The animation is a very short bit at the start of the vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRQXiI8-_EI

[Fishyninja]

The overarching question is if the players actually want that out of the game. A survival game has a very focused concept and audience. D&D not so much.

Not everyone drawn to D&D wants to play Ledgers and Luggage.

True. The tone of the game is not complete high fantasy and not quite low fantasy, they enjoy a lot of elements of realism so I am surprised that Encumbrance has suddenly become an issue for them. It irks me more that rather than discuss their issues like adults they just chose to ignore the rule.

[KorvinStarmast]

(Yes, 30: I believe 1e AD&D is when the game stopped suggesting formal rules for dungeon crawling, as I haven't seen those rules outside of pre-AD&D stuff.) My version of the 1e DMG has plenty of time, encumbrance, and turn rules, so that did port that in from Original three brown books. In fact, EGG makes a bit of a deal on how important it is for the DM to keep track of time.

Here's a trick one of my old DM's used: a six sided die and a 12 sided die. Turn 1, pip= 1 on both. Turn 2, pip 2 on d6, 1 on d12. And so on, each turn is ten minutes). Turn 9? d6 on pip 3, d12 on pip 2. Whenever the d6 gets to six pips, he makes one random monster roll. (sometimes, he did it on pip 3 ...)

If I remember rightly, the In Search fo the Unknown module suggested that, only the d6 bit, in its how to be a DM primer so that you know when to roll for random monsters ... every hour.

[Segev]

The overarching question is if the players actually want that out of the game. A survival game has a very focused concept and audience. D&D not so much.

Not everyone drawn to D&D wants to play Ledgers and Luggage.And not every player drawn to D&D wants to play dungeon crawling (as odd as that may sound). But this DM clearly does want encumbrance to be a thing, so saying "his players may not want to play that game," while valid, makes one question why his players agreed to play the game he outlined.


My version of the 1e DMG has plenty of time, encumbrance, and turn rules, so that did port that in from Original three brown books. In fact, EGG makes a bit of a deal on how important it is for the DM to keep track of time.

Here's a trick one of my old DM's used: a six sided die and a 12 sided die. Turn 1, pip= 1 on both. Turn 2, pip 2 on d6, 1 on d12. And so on, each turn is ten minutes). Turn 9? d6 on pip 3, d12 on pip 2. Whenever the d6 gets to six pips, he makes one random monster roll. (sometimes, he did it on pip 3 ...)

If I remember rightly, the In Search fo the Unknown module suggested that, only the d6 bit, in its how to be a DM primer so that you know when to roll for random monsters ... every hour.
Not a bad way to do things. The biggest issue, for me, in such cases is the idea of "what is a turn?" The old school rules codified precisely what you could do during a turn, so it made the time passage something the DM didn't need to guestimate so much.

[KorvinStarmast]

And not every player drawn to D&D wants to play dungeon crawling (as odd as that may sound). Yeah, which is where the strength of the game was in a lot of ways. Other environment are also suitable, but dungeon crawls are right in the wheel house.

The biggest issue, for me, in such cases is the idea of "what is a turn?" The old school rules codified precisely what you could do during a turn, so it made the time passage something the DM didn't need to guestimate so much. Yep. A turn was ten minutes, and a combat round was 1 minute, at that point in time. There were also segments during combat

The surprise segment is 6 seconds. Avoiding, parleying, awaiting the action of the surprised, missile discharge, and setting of weapons (typically speors or spearing types of pole arms) are possible. Most spells cannot be cast in a single segment, although first level magic-user/illusinost spells ore usually but 1 segment long, as are some other spells, and these spells ore possible to use in a surprise segment.

[Segev]

Yep. A turn was ten minutes, and a combat round was 1 minute, at that point in time. There were also segments during combat, which IIRC were either a fifth or a sixth of a round. (Casting time in segments came into play in AD&D 1e). It could get clunky really fast with a big group.

I was unclear. While I agree with what you say here, and they're good to mention, they don't address what you quoted to respond to, at least as I meant it. Which is to say: I was unclear, so let me clarify.

The trouble I have always had is with figuring out how long in-game has passed as players do stuff outside of combat time. By having turns codified to be 10 minutes AND having specific things that can be done within one turn, that makes this far more doable for me, as a DM. Using a system such as this, I'm not trying to guess how long it's been and whether it's too soon to check for a random encounter, for example.

Or maybe you did pick up what I was saying, in which case I apologize for belaboring it.

[Avonar]

Interesting choices and consequences. Risk and Conflict

It's a common trope in movies for adventurers to find a hoard of treasure, or even one item. Usually followed by the treasure room collapsing leaving the group with the choices of running, running with some items, or staying and dying with the hoard.

It's about that choice for the player. I am not actively denying them treasure, if they find a hoard they can take it but its not going to be a simple case of picking it all up and walking out with it. The choice becomes part of the game, do they hire people to collect it and risk thieves? Do multiple trips with horses and carts and try to fend off potential bandits? Take what they can carry and mark the location for later?

If we ignored encumbrance........that goes away.

If this is the main reason you want to use encumbrance, it can be solved with one simple sentence:

"Inside you see a hoard of treasure and you can instantly tell is far too much for the X of you to carry. What would you like to do?"

That accomplishes what you are after without the need for tracking all those weights etc. It introduces the problem you want the players to solve without the need for mechanic that some of them don't like.

I do get the idea of giving the players more than they can carry and letting them figure out the details of carrying it. I can see how you would like the idea of it. Do your players? People on here can go back and forth about what to do, what not to do, is encumbrance good or bad, who's right and who's wrong, and it's all kind of meaningless. Talk to your players. If a reasonable proportion of them don't want to track their encumbrance, then perhaps it's time to think about not using it. There are plenty of other problems to solve you can throw at them. Don't forget that the DM needs to adjust to the players just as much as the players need to adjust to the DM.

A good group of players is not something to squander.

[Fishyninja]

If this is the main reason you want to use encumbrance, it can be solved with one simple sentence:

"Inside you see a hoard of treasure and you can instantly tell is far too much for the X of you to carry. What would you like to do?"

That accomplishes what you are after without the need for tracking all those weights etc. It introduces the problem you want the players to solve without the need for mechanic that some of them don't like.


Normally this would be true for any other hoard. But this hoard is in a hard to reach location so carts and horses are not


I do get the idea of giving the players more than they can carry and letting them figure out the details of carrying it. I can see how you would like the idea of it. Do your players?

4 out of 6 want to carry on with encumbrance, one is not keen but doesn't want to rock the boat. I have one who ias adamant not to use it. I think this is due to the hoard being difficult to transport.

[deljzc]

There are number of theory issues with encumbrance in D&D.

First, the base rules are designed to play with encumbrance and REWARD strength with greater carrying capacity. When you eliminate encumbrance (or tracking encumbrance), you decrease the value of strength scores and further add to the divide between STR and DEX currently in 5e (and you will find many threats on that issue).

Second, playing with encumbrance is kind of a pain in the ass for DM's unless the PC's buy into it and manage encumbrance themselves (and are honest about it). The DM already has too many things to take care of. He should not have to be a constant "encumbrance checker" on the party, although that often happens. And any time the DM becomes sort of a "rules checker" on the party it can feel like nitpicking the rules lawyering. And players can start to resent it.

All the MINOR rules in D&D are best played when the PC's manage them among themselves. Once the DM starts having to enforce this aspect of D&D, things can break down pretty quickly without good communication and understanding.

The "reality" of roll-playing under the framework of the rules is best when everyone at the table contributes to accuracy and fairness. As a DM, I really appreciate when players sort of police themselves. I like when players find treasure and take the initiative to think about encumbrance.. "Okay, who has room to carry all this stuff?", rather than the DM having to ask and stop the game around it.

Part of that is being a good player. Knowing the rules. And assuming the rules (even minor ones) still need to be covered/discussed/enforced at times throughout the play session.

DM's put a lot of time and effort into creating the world/image/details of players' surroundings. When players just gloss right over it, ignore minor rules for ease/quickness of play (be it encumbrance, difficult terrain, cover, movement, reach, etc.), that can likewise create some resentment from DM's as well. Again, communication is key. Both sides have to agree to a level of detail in the game and not feel offended with one side or the other doesn't live up to those agreed upon levels.

[KorvinStarmast]

All the MINOR rules in D&D are best played when the PC's manage them among themselves. Once the DM starts having to enforce this aspect of D&D, things can break down pretty quickly without good communication and understanding. Fine all around post, from which I take a key point on how it can work: DM and players getting on the same page and embracing it. *applause*

[Pelle]

Now maybe the argument I am going to propose is exaggerated, but if we throw out an established rule like encumbrance because its boring to track, why not throw out HP, because you have to track that, or class resources and spell slots? You know what lets get rid of DC's as well?

If those are boring to track, why should you not throw them out as well? Now, if those things matter, they wont be boring to track. But if let's say you never have more than 1 encounter per adventuring day (wilderness trekking?), then there is indeed no point in tracking daily resources like spell slots.

[Pex]

Right. Pex I've seen you make this claim before, but it's only the case that it's not about consequences (and by implication interesting decisions) if the players have all the time in the world and no danger nearby. Otherwise, it's exactly about interesting decisions and consequences.

Especially in a save the world type scenario. "Do the plucky heroes doom the world by giving in to the lure of riches?"

If the DM does it often enough I would if I haven't quit the game yet. It's a sign the DM is playing against me, not with me. It's his own gameworld he's dooming.

The first time it happens it's a puzzle to work out that's part of the fun. The second time it's annoying but whatever. We can leave the copper pieces. The third time I'm dealing with a DM who hates his players.

[Xetheral]

You shouldn't have to convince people to do what they've agreed to do. Especially when they've been blatantly disrespecting you.

It's perfectly reasonable for Fishyninja to feel "blatantly disrespect[ed]" in this circumstance. At the same time, disrespect can be reasonably perceived even when the source of the feeling did not intend to be disrespectful. In the situation FishyNinja has described, I think it's pretty clear that no disrespect was intended by the players who aren't tracking encumbrance. Indeed, it seems likely to me that it isn't apparent to those players why their failure to track encumbrance is a matter of respect at all.

In such a circumstance, it seems unlikely to me that requiring future compliance on the basis of "[y]ou shouldn't have to convince people to do what they've agreed to do" will be productive. Instead, since Fishyninja desires continued engagement with these players, I think it's essential to have a discussion that both communicates why Fishyninja feels disrespected in this circumstance, but also acknowledges the legitimacy of the players' belief that they've done nothing wrong (because they didn't yet know that failure to track encumbrance would be perceived by Fishyninja as disrespectful).

I recognize that you view the players' actions as objectively disrespectful, but there is no good way to convince someone who disagrees with you on that point. Rather than trying to do so anyway, I think it's likely to be more productive to instead simply try to communicate Fishyninja's subjective feeling of being disrespected, and ask the players to respect that feeling. Doing so, however, comes at the inevitable cost of needing to reciprocally respect the players' subjective feeling that they didn't do anything wrong. It's an unsatisying approach for the person who feels disrespected, but I also think it's the best case outcome in a situation where there is an evident disagreement over what behavior qualified as disrespectful in the first place.


So from looking at the responses it seems a fairly even split between:

- Its not a big deal, just don't bother with Encumbrance

and

- You asked them to do something and they haven't this needs to be sorted.

Now maybe the argument I am going to propose is exaggerated, but if we throw out an established rule like encumbrance because its boring to track, why not throw out HP, because you have to track that, or class resources and spell slots? You know what lets get rid of DC's as well?

I am intentionally being sarcastic to make a point. It may seem like a minor thing, but it is important to some of the players in the group and to me.
Is it wrong to feel upset and concerned that something I have asked my players to do is being ignored by some?

Following up on what I said to Unoriginal, above, feeling upset and concerned is not wrong at all. But since your players evidently disagree with you about whether it's a big deal, the best you can hope for is to ask them to care about encumbrance because it makes you feel upset and concerned when they don't. But you can't reasonably ask them to change their behavior as a result of your feelings if you're not also willing to recognize the legitimacy of their contrasting opinion that it isn't a big deal.

That you characterized your own comparison of encumbrance to HP and DCs as "exaggerated" means you already do recognize that it's reasonable to see a distinction between "cheating" at the big rules and simply letting smaller rules slide. Your players just see a stronger distinction than you do. If you can get yourself to a place where you see their perspective on the degree of distinction as equally valid as your own (and can communicate that understanding successfully) I think you'll be much more likely to be able to get them to agree to track encumbrance even though they don't want to.

I hope my perspective helps!

[Tanarii]

If the DM does it often enough I would if I haven't quit the game yet. It's a sign the DM is playing against me, not with me. It's his own gameworld he's dooming.

The first time it happens it's a puzzle to work out that's part of the fun. The second time it's annoying but whatever. We can leave the copper pieces. The third time I'm dealing with a DM who hates his players.
The DMs job is to give players choices, and the players is to make them.

Normally it's the player making a choice for the PC dealing with in game consequences, instead of the player projecting the in game choice as the DM being against them. But close enough. Mission accomplished, win win. :p

[Avonar]

Normally this would be true for any other hoard. But this hoard is in a hard to reach location so carts and horses are not



4 out of 6 want to carry on with encumbrance, one is not keen but doesn't want to rock the boat. I have one who ias adamant not to use it. I think this is due to the hoard being difficult to transport.

So...what do you want from them then? It somewhat sounds like you're giving them a reward that they can't claim due to being too big/bulky? If getting resources to transport it isn't viable, then why do it? Not trying to say you're doing anything wrong here, I'm genuinely curious what puzzle it is you want them to solve.

[Segev]

If this is the main reason you want to use encumbrance, it can be solved with one simple sentence:

"Inside you see a hoard of treasure and you can instantly tell is far too much for the X of you to carry. What would you like to do?"

That accomplishes what you are after without the need for tracking all those weights etc. It introduces the problem you want the players to solve without the need for mechanic that some of them don't like.

I do get the idea of giving the players more than they can carry and letting them figure out the details of carrying it. I can see how you would like the idea of it. Do your players? People on here can go back and forth about what to do, what not to do, is encumbrance good or bad, who's right and who's wrong, and it's all kind of meaningless. Talk to your players. If a reasonable proportion of them don't want to track their encumbrance, then perhaps it's time to think about not using it. There are plenty of other problems to solve you can throw at them. Don't forget that the DM needs to adjust to the players just as much as the players need to adjust to the DM.

A good group of players is not something to squander.

In my experience, the moment you say that sentence is the moment they start breaking out the encumbrance rules, themselves, to try to prove you wrong. And they often will forget about all the gear they haven't tracked encumbrance on that they're carrying, just looking at the loot as the only thing they need to figure out the weight of and as if that's all that would be part of what they're carrying.

I'm not making accusations, nor casting aspersions, here, either; players will legitimately forget that stuff, thinking you've just tried to welsch on the proffered loot and wanting to maximize what they can get despite your assertion that they can't carry it all.

[Pex]

In my experience, the moment you say that sentence is the moment they start breaking out the encumbrance rules, themselves, to try to prove you wrong. And they often will forget about all the gear they haven't tracked encumbrance on that they're carrying, just looking at the loot as the only thing they need to figure out the weight of and as if that's all that would be part of what they're carrying.

I'm not making accusations, nor casting aspersions, here, either; players will legitimately forget that stuff, thinking you've just tried to welsch on the proffered loot and wanting to maximize what they can get despite your assertion that they can't carry it all.

Exactly. The players and DM are playing against each other. The DM is dangling treasure on a string and pulling it away while the players try to jump high enough to grab it. I concede once is fine. It's a puzzle to solve, and it's possible for the players to be ok with having to leave some of it behind. When it becomes a pattern of play, even disregarding my hyperbole of DM tyranny, that's when encumbrance is no longer fun for the players. It becomes a series of frustration and resentment.

[GorogIrongut]

To the OP, I haven't read all of the posts in this thread, but I would go with a carrot/stick approach.

1. Players who choose to track encumbrance receive the two following consequences:

a. If they are within encumbrance limits, they can add a d4 to any stealth checks.

b. If they are over their encumbrance limits, their bags, backpacks, etc. (loot containing items) run a 10% risk per day of splitting open. They are ruined.

For the effort spent tracking their encumbrance, the players automatically get an inspiration die per session regardless of their being under/over.

2. For those players too lazy to track their encumbrance, they need to be comfortable with you doing a quick check of their encumbrance weights. Do the spot check every other gaming session. Give them a leeway of 50% to their encumbrance. Step in and tell them to get rid of stuff when they go over the leeway.

With option 1 they get a guaranteed reward with a further possible boost to their stealth checks. Option 2 is the stick, because they have to show their sheet to you every other session. That invasion of privacy is to compensate for the extra work you have to do to keep them nominally compliant.

[Tanarii]

Exactly. The players and DM are playing against each other. The DM is dangling treasure on a string and pulling it away while the players try to jump high enough to grab it. I concede once is fine. It's a puzzle to solve, and it's possible for the players to be ok with having to leave some of it behind. When it becomes a pattern of play, even disregarding my hyperbole of DM tyranny, that's when encumbrance is no longer fun for the players. It becomes a series of frustration and resentment.
Less so when there is an explicit reward, character improvement, of some kind for getting treasure out if the dungeon. Then it becomes part of the challenge.

IMX player can always find ways to spend treasure. But direct and visible power improvements for the character that impact play are generally most appealing. "Retire from the dangerous life and live like a king" isn't as appealing when the game is about exciting adventures and the player won't experience it. Same for armies and bases and rulership, if that's not going to directly impact play.

[Segev]

Exactly. The players and DM are playing against each other. The DM is dangling treasure on a string and pulling it away while the players try to jump high enough to grab it. I concede once is fine. It's a puzzle to solve, and it's possible for the players to be ok with having to leave some of it behind. When it becomes a pattern of play, even disregarding my hyperbole of DM tyranny, that's when encumbrance is no longer fun for the players. It becomes a series of frustration and resentment.


Less so when there is an explicit reward, character improvement, of some kind for getting treasure out if the dungeon. Then it becomes part of the challenge.

IMX player can always find ways to spend treasure. But direct and visible power improvements for the character that impact play are generally most appealing. "Retire from the dangerous life and live like a king" isn't as appealing when the game is about exciting adventures and the player won't experience it. Same for armies and bases and rulership, if that's not going to directly impact play.

I'm with Tanarii, here, in that if it's the typical pattern - there's this loot you need to haul out, and it's going to require some logistical effort to manage it - then that's part of the game and, yes, making encumbrance part of the game. Just like putting monsters between you and the treasure is part of the game, not the DM dangling the treasure on a string and pulling it away by putting monsters as guardians over it.

[Morty]

Now maybe the argument I am going to propose is exaggerated, but if we throw out an established rule like encumbrance because its boring to track, why not throw out HP, because you have to track that, or class resources and spell slots? You know what lets get rid of DC's as well?

I am intentionally being sarcastic to make a point. It may seem like a minor thing, but it is important to some of the players in the group and to me.
Is it wrong to feel upset and concerned that something I have asked my players to do is being ignored by some?

The impact of getting rid of those systems is so completely different that the comparison doesn't make sense even if it's sarcastic. If you drop HP, the game's main activity stops functioning. If you lose spells slots, the game's central mechanic and means of accomplishing anything likewise can't work. If you drop encumbrance... the worst thing that can happen is that some players might pack more gear than they otherwise might. But probably not.

Frankly, in my experience long gear lists aren't even there to be used, they just look pretty. Having a dozen knick-knacks like ball bearings, caltrops, rope, whatever else is just... expected. A genre convention.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Hi All, so this is a two pronged question. Some explanation is down below but have included a TLDR up here.

I have specifically requested players to use encumbrance rules, half the group have been, have just found out that some other people have not been and some at present are refusing to use/track encumbrance.
Is this cheating? Is there a way to convince people (without kicking them etc) that using encumbrance can be interesting? What is the best way to track others encumbrance?

First of all, what is your general opinion on using Encumbrance? Do you use it to add elements of realism to the game and to present other challenges for the players to overcome? (i.e. 'Wow how are we going to carry all of this gold, armour and loot we just got!) or do you find it too much of an exercise to track.

For those of you who do prefer to use it, do you enforce it and how? Also if you come across players not using it would you consider it cheating?

In my game I have asked the group on multiple occasions to use encumbrance rules (I prefer to use it for a slight aspect of realism and to make characters think about load outs, supplies etc.). Last session, mid-dungeon on Roll20 I find out that some members of the party have not been adhering to this. The person in question was unable to play but mentioned that I could run her character for her, I noticed her character was 90lbs over her encumbrance limit so text her asking if we could talk about it. She was fine with it and we have hashed out her sheet (minor mismanagement) which was all conducted after the session.

However during the session I asked people to check the encumbrances and found out that some people didn't really want to track encumbrance and some flat out refused to saying it was not important.
I countered saying that it is in-fact important as weight affects many important aspects of the game, i.e. Mage hand carrying 10lbs, Bag of holding carrying 500lbs and has the potential to burst. Carrying a downed team mate etc.

I got the general responses of "Well other DM's don't do this" and "I didn't want to really have to do math everytime I pick an item up etc."
I explained to them that the sheets on Roll20 automatically calculate weights for 99% of the items you pick up and for that 1% they don't to check with me.

Anyway after finishing the session I had some players approach me saying that the fact I asked them to track encumbrance feels like I am taking control from their character. I obviously responded with that was not the case and I am asking them to follow a rule that is established and has mechanical effects in the game.

They then stated I was accusing them of cheating, and although I did not say it in those words. I think they are right.

So I am now presented with a situation where:
1) I forgo encumbrance for some things (like item weights, gold etc) but apply it to spells and magic item restrictions and have to trust my players that they will behave and will not try to break the game with it.

2) Enforce encumbrance, potentially pissing off a few players, mid-dungeon and trust them to do as I asked (which they haven't done already)

3) Enforce Encumbrance and think of a way to track their encumbrance on my own along with everything else I need to do as a DM.

Any advice?

EDITS OF NOTE

We use Roll20 for the Game so weights for most of the items are automatically calculated
We are using simple encumbrance (Strength Score x 15)
The encumbrance rule was established in Session 0 and all players have this as a document to refer too.
The players are not new, they are seasoned, as is the campaign. Usually most issues can be resolved in game but this one has been going on for nearly a week with no end in sight.
I have made a macro for Roll20 that shows me what a characters total and current encumbrance is.


Current Decision
I have made a macro to help me as the DM track the players encumbrance. I have also just text the entire party stating that we did all agree to use the encumbrance rules in session 0 and that I would like to continue to do that, however if they do not wish too we can have a chat about it and work out something potentially.

I have stated that if we are going to do encumbrance, if a player doesn't know the weight of something (i.e. not in the PHB) then let me know and I'll add it in after session Unless it is going to make them over encumbered in the session.

It's on my players to track encumberance if they care, I don't do so, and I don't check, because I don't really care. Your encumbrance limit in 5e RaW is so very high that there's basically no possibility of reaching it with your carried equipment short of carrying like 15 swords, so the only time it's actually relevant is if you want to pick up or push or otherwise move some very heavy thing in the dungeon like a statue, which I just call for strength checks to move.

So, in essence, in 5e specifically I don't find encumbrance to matter, so I mostly ignore it.



The impact of getting rid of those systems is so completely different that the comparison doesn't make sense even if it's sarcastic. If you drop HP, the game's main activity stops functioning. If you lose spells slots, the game's central mechanic and means of accomplishing anything likewise can't work. If you drop encumbrance... the worst thing that can happen is that some players might pack more gear than they otherwise might. But probably not.

Frankly, in my experience long gear lists aren't even there to be used, they just look pretty. Having a dozen knick-knacks like ball bearings, caltrops, rope, whatever else is just... expected. A genre convention.

To be fair, combat heavy games can work just fine without HP. I've worked on making my own HP-less system before, because I don't like HP and the mechanical and tactical implications that result from it.

[Rynjin]

I wonder in what other occasions you're advocating to "let it go".

Players don't count the gold they spend, let it go?

Players doesn't subtract damages to their PCs' HPs correctly, let it go?

Do you allow players to use gold as a GM? Do you deal damage to them as the GM? If yes, then you are actually utilizing those rules, and so no, they shouldn't be ignored.

Gold, though, is another good one to "fudge" if you're not actually doing anything with it. If you're not providing any meaningful gold sink (like a magic item mart), then what does it matter how much gold the players actually have?

The facts as presented in this thread are that the OP has been running this game for a YEAR (unless I read that wrong), and encumbrance has never come up. For all the theoretical reasons why it COULD be interesting he never used any of them.

If you aren't using the rule anyway, it doesn't particularly matter whether someone broke it or not, now does it?



By that logic, if you find out your long-term partner with whom you've agreed have an exclusive relationship has been sleeping with someone else, you should just accept it unless you were harmed physically or in another tangible fashion (ex: lost money, etc) because otherwise it's just being "riled up over the principle of the thing".

Yeah, if you're unironically equivocating a single minor rule in your elf-game with a real life problem, you probably need to seek professional help to get your priorities straight.

You cannot actually believe the two things are equivalent, so no, the response is not based on "logic", it's just a really poorly thought out gotcha question. Logic is context based.

Relationship issues fall into the context box of "Real Problems". Having a dispute with your players about what rules should be used does not.

[Morty]

To be fair, combat heavy games can work just fine without HP. I've worked on making my own HP-less system before, because I don't like HP and the mechanical and tactical implications that result from it.

Well, obviously. HP aren't necessary in general and games exist without them. But in this particular context, "removing HP" means removing them from 5E as it exists without replacing them with something else. Which would take heavy homebrewing at best.

[Unoriginal]

The facts as presented in this thread are that the OP has been running this game for a YEAR (unless I read that wrong), and encumbrance has never come up. For all the theoretical reasons why it COULD be interesting he never used any of them.

If you aren't using the rule anyway, it doesn't particularly matter whether someone broke it or not, now does it?

The fact as presented in this thread is that 4 out of 6 players have been following the encumbrance rules, as stated by OP.



Yeah, if you're unironically equivocating a single minor rule in your elf-game with a real life problem, you probably need to seek professional help to get your priorities straight.

You cannot actually believe the two things are equivalent, so no, the response is not based on "logic", it's just a really poorly thought out gotcha question. Logic is context based.

Relationship issues fall into the context box of "Real Problems". Having a dispute with your players about what rules should be used does not.

It is not about the rule, it has never been about the rule. This IS a relationship issue, because "playing games with X person" is a relationship.

When several persons agree to something, what happens is that either a) everyone follows the agreement or b) the people who want to change the agreement make that fact known so it can be discussed. Two of OP's players didn't, deciding instead to stop following the agreement until it was noticed they did so, and that is an issue in the relationship between those two and the rest of the table.

You're the one who made the context-independent statement that getting riled up over the principle was not worth it, but if people doesn't follow principles such as "follow the rules we agreed on" or "let's talk if you're not happy about something so we can solve the issue", there can be no trust, and a relationship without trust is not one worth having around a RPG table.

So sure it far from being as bad as cheating on your partner, but it's still a breach of the trust others put in you. DMs and other players shouldn't have to worry if you're actually following what you agreed to do.

[Segev]

The facts as presented in this thread are that the OP has been running this game for a YEAR (unless I read that wrong), and encumbrance has never come up. For all the theoretical reasons why it COULD be interesting he never used any of them.

To be fair, a DM who is assuming his players are playing by the rules might not realize for a year that they're not tracking hp, either, and just think they've been able to tough out his monster battles.

[Fishyninja]

If those are boring to track, why should you not throw them out as well? Now, if those things matter, they wont be boring to track. But if let's say you never have more than 1 encounter per adventuring day (wilderness trekking?), then there is indeed no point in tracking daily resources like spell slots.

Ok maybe I am not understanding your point here but it seems the weight of your argument is that HP/Slots/Rations seem to be important we should track them but encumbrance is not important so we shouldn't track it?
If I am misunderstanding please say.


So...what do you want from them then? It somewhat sounds like you're giving them a reward that they can't claim due to being too big/bulky? If getting resources to transport it isn't viable, then why do it? Not trying to say you're doing anything wrong here, I'm genuinely curious what puzzle it is you want them to solve.

Well its not a puzzle per se but as part of this module I am running there is a large amount of treasure. This module is usually run as a one shot but I am integrating it into my campaign as an arc.
It's not so much a puzzle I am trying to make them solve per se but there are certain factors: 4 of the party members are in debt for various reasons, this gold could not only pay of the debt but keep them affluent which they all want. . The puzzle per-se is that the dungeon is in a mountain 800ft above ground level with no real obvious method of getting up or down the mountain. They got in by convincing a creature to carry them who is now no longer available.

So, the puzzle is basically.......is the gold (and what it could accomplish) worth the risk of transporting it down the mountain.

The point that I envision (which could be entirely incorrect) is that with the amount of gold that they could find the following could happen:
- One character will pay off his family's debt and make them a powerhouse in Waterdeep, which would secure his position as a man of influence.
- One character could pay off his and his daughters debt to another character and make them essentially freeman
- One character could stop being a thief and enter polite society.
- Once character (whom is dissenting the encumbrance rule) could donate most of their share to the Church of Selune in order to help the poor and try to absolve her sins


To be fair, a DM who is assuming his players are playing by the rules might not realize for a year that they're not tracking hp, either, and just think they've been able to tough out his monster battles.

Yes, since these are all experienced players (from 2nd Edition onwards) I am surprised that there would be such dissent about Encumbrance.

[Pelle]

Ok maybe I am not understanding your point here but it seems the weight of your argument is that HP/Slots/Rations seem to be important we should track them but encumbrance is not important so we shouldn't track it?
If I am misunderstanding please say.

Totally depends on your campaign. If it matter, track it. If it don't, then don't track. Sounds like the biggest consequence of not tracking encumbrance so far after a year is that someone carried some extra arrows or an extra backup weapon. That's hardly consequential in the big picture. (Please expand, if you realized earlier some players didn't track encumbrance, would there really be any big meaningful differences in your emergent story?) In comparison, the consequence of not tracking HP could be the difference of a PC death or not.

[Rynjin]

Well its not a puzzle per se but as part of this module I am running there is a large amount of treasure. This module is usually run as a one shot but I am integrating it into my campaign as an arc.
It's not so much a puzzle I am trying to make them solve per se but there are certain factors: 4 of the party members are in debt for various reasons, this gold could not only pay of the debt but keep them affluent which they all want. . The puzzle per-se is that the dungeon is in a mountain 800ft above ground level with no real obvious method of getting up or down the mountain. They got in by convincing a creature to carry them who is now no longer available.

So, the puzzle is basically.......is the gold (and what it could accomplish) worth the risk of transporting it down the mountain.

The point that I envision (which could be entirely incorrect) is that with the amount of gold that they could find the following could happen:
- One character will pay off his family's debt and make them a powerhouse in Waterdeep, which would secure his position as a man of influence.
- One character could pay off his and his daughters debt to another character and make them essentially freeman
- One character could stop being a thief and enter polite society.
- Once character (whom is dissenting the encumbrance rule) could donate most of their share to the Church of Selune in order to help the poor and try to absolve her sins

Okay, so several of your players are looking to make great character development strides; ones any GM should be proud to have play out in their game.

And you're nitpicking over encumbrance to...stop that from happening? Situations like this are why so many PCs are written with the "no family, no friends, no connections" paradigm; because attempts to actually move plots forward are always stymied by inconsequential things like this or the GM simply not paying attention in the first place.

[Zhorn]

When digging down into people's reasoning of "encumbrance is not important" you will tend to find a collection of other rules also being ignored, or encounters/modes of play also not cropping up at all in their games.
What gives encumbrance it's importance isn't just one big singular aspect of play, it's an interconnection with a whole lot of subsystems, and for each one you cut out the area of importance of encumbrance diminishes.

Fast forward past overland travel, supplies for the journey are irrelevant.
Don't track daily food and water requirements to avoid starvation and dehydration? Carrying food and water is no longer important and doesn't require bag space.
Don't track ammunition? arrows and quivers don't take an allotment of inventory weight, with ranged combatants free to constantly remain at a safe distance from melee combat.
No tracking of light sources or their durations, or even tracking the passage of time spent in dungeons? Torches, lanterns and oil supplies are now moot.
No climbing, with all travel paths on easily accessible walking paths? Don't bother with any climbing equipment or means of getting heavy things up and down difficult elevations (ropes, climbing kits, block and tackle)
Traps are not used, or disarming them is just a roll without any narrative use and expenditure of tools? There goes a whole lot of uses for 10-foot-poles, mirrors, ball bearings, pitons, and a bunch of other miscellaneous items.
and on and on and on.

Keep stripping out aspects of the game, and d&d just gets smaller and smaller.
Again this is my bias talking here. I like dungeon delving and survival aspects of travel. A big part of play is preparing your equipment and supplies for a journey with the limitation based on how much you can store in your bags and carry, and what extra supplies you have traveling with your hirelings to be kept at camp with the wagons and pack mules.
There's no fast forward to the boss chamber, then be immediately back at the tavern with all the treasure while you seduce the barmaid. There's a challenge in how you get to the dungeon without getting lost, how long can you spend away from civilization without a resupply, how deep into the lightless dungeon can you delve AND get back out before your light sources run out, what supplies you brought to address the challenges you accounted for, what can you use to MacGyver up a solution for the things you didn't prepare for, how you get the treasure out of the dungeons, and how do you get it all back to civilisation.
Encumbrance ties into to so many of those aspects and more.

Want to play a game without it? Sure, it's not a wrong way to play, all d&d is legitimate d&d. But it is a smaller and easier version of d&d, one with less danger, less death, and faster and simpler levelling, and i think you'd have more fun if you played a different and more rules light system instead of insisting that so much of d&d should be ignored.

[Mellack]

What gives encumbrance it's importance isn't just one big singular aspect of play, it's an interconnection with a whole lot of subsystems, and for each one you cut out the area of importance of encumbrance diminishes.

Fast forward past overland travel, supplies for the journey are irrelevant.
Don't track daily food and water requirements to avoid starvation and dehydration? Carrying food and water is no longer important and doesn't require bag space.
Don't track ammunition? arrows and quivers don't take an allotment of inventory weight, with ranged combatants free to constantly remain at a safe distance from melee combat.
No tracking of light sources or their durations, or even tracking the passage of time spent in dungeons? Torches, lanterns and oil supplies are now moot.
No climbing, with all travel paths on easily accessible walking paths? Don't bother with any climbing equipment or means of getting heavy things up and down difficult elevations (ropes, climbing kits, block and tackle)
Traps are not used, or disarming them is just a roll without any narrative use and expenditure of tools? There goes a whole lot of uses for 10-foot-poles, mirrors, ball bearings, pitons, and a bunch of other miscellaneous items.
and on and on and on.

I understand what you are saying, but the game itself makes many of those issues trivial rather quickly. Food and water can be solved by 1st level spells. Light can be created by a cantrip, and a 2nd level spell can create permanent light sources. Phantom steed can remove the need for mounts for travel, and teleport can remove travel completely. Levitate, spider climb, or natural flight abilities can replace climbing. Bags of Holding, portable holes, flying brooms, and so many other things replace the mundane parts. Just so much of the common stuff fades away as characters level that it truly does become irrelevant.

[Zhorn]

"trivial"
The game doesn't make it trivial, there are just active choices and trade-offs that offer solutions to some problems.
They range from choices for the players in some cases (usually swapping one option/resource for another), active decision by the DM in others (which is then not the game doing things but akin to DM also just ignore those situation by ACTIVELY trivialising it themselves by choice), and a random occurrence on loot tables for the remainder (at relatively low % when you break it down).

Goodberry at first level is chewing up a a spell slot from a very finite number at low levels, and as not being a ritual means it is also locking out an option as far as your prepared list for the day is concerned. If you run single encounter days in safe areas where nothing else is doing to challenge the party that day, then it is an easy choice to make, but if there's any chance of combat that spell slot is more valuable in eliminating a threat to your life, or used on a heal to revive an unconscious/dying ally, since Goodberry can't help since it needs an action of the person to eat it (potions can be administered by RAW, Goodberry makes no such claim).
It also was intended to do nothing for water needs, just food (citation (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/653619890058739712)). And being only on the Druid/Ranger spell list it is not universally applicable to all groups.
Only makes carrying food trivial when 1st level slots are trivial, and that all comes down to the style of play.

Create food and Water is a 3rd level, non-ritual spell. It is occupying a prepared spell choice for the day and is one less 3rd level slot you have for spending on other problems, unless you are a Genie Warlock and can get a short rest immediately after casting it then it is not a trivial expenditure of resources. Like above with Goodberry, there's also a matter of what classes/subclasses have it on their spell list as to what level they'll have access to it, and also like above only makes food and water trivial if 3rd level slots are already trivial.

Cantrips creating light are great, Light and Dancing Lights are highly valuable to me. Not everyone is playing a caster. Not all casters value cantrips equally, and some have cantrips that they value more to use their limited selection on. Choosing to dedicate a cantrip selection to the light source problem is not trivial.

Continual Flame is going to cost you 50 gp worth of ruby dust per pop, and isn't going to survive antimagic zones or area dispells. Good utility, but cost and drawbacks are not trivial though.

Phantom Steed, a useful ritual that is only on the wizard's spell list. Good for solo travel, but if trying to transport a party is either going to be chewing up a large potion of your day refreshing the ritual castings, or burning through your 3rd+ spell slots at a rate of one-per-mount-per-hour. Not trivial.

Teleports are awesome, both the Teleportation and Teleportation Circle variants. Reliability of destinations takes at least some effort though, as is with getting large treasure hauls trough the defined spaces of the spell. Very good if you account for all the factors involved, but expending the resources into making a base to safely teleport treasure to is not a trivial undertaking, and some dungeons (such as tomb of annihilation and the Dungeon of the Mad Mage) have wardings against such solutions. Mordenkainen's Private Sanctum on a dungeon lair is the perfect counter to teleporting adventurers. Generally I don't think we can call spellcasting of 5th and 7th level trivial by the sheer nature of them being such high level spells.

Magic items offering solutions are only as trivial as the effort taken to obtain them. How often are you getting an opportunity to roll on the Magic Item Table that has the specific item you are after, and then what is the % chance of the result you wanting to pop up? Outside of those random occurrences, the DM giving you a specific item is them doing a thing, not the game.
Also as talked about earlier in the thread; some of these times have encumbrance mechanics factored in: Bags of Holding (has a weight/volume limit), Portable Holes (volume limit), Brooms of Flying (note it has an weight limit).

I agree that having access to the right spells and magic items gives easier solutions to some of the more 'mundane' feeling challenges, but they are not trivial solutions, in either needing to invest your build into having the spells at the right level AND be willing to use those resources in place of what the mundane solutions would cost you, or getting lucky with a random roll to have a magic item capable of does more than what you can achieve on your own.
Not every party is going to have all (or possibly any) of these listed solutions.

[Avonar]

Well its not a puzzle per se but as part of this module I am running there is a large amount of treasure. This module is usually run as a one shot but I am integrating it into my campaign as an arc.
It's not so much a puzzle I am trying to make them solve per se but there are certain factors: 4 of the party members are in debt for various reasons, this gold could not only pay of the debt but keep them affluent which they all want. . The puzzle per-se is that the dungeon is in a mountain 800ft above ground level with no real obvious method of getting up or down the mountain. They got in by convincing a creature to carry them who is now no longer available.

So, the puzzle is basically.......is the gold (and what it could accomplish) worth the risk of transporting it down the mountain.

The point that I envision (which could be entirely incorrect) is that with the amount of gold that they could find the following could happen:
- One character will pay off his family's debt and make them a powerhouse in Waterdeep, which would secure his position as a man of influence.
- One character could pay off his and his daughters debt to another character and make them essentially freeman
- One character could stop being a thief and enter polite society.
- Once character (whom is dissenting the encumbrance rule) could donate most of their share to the Church of Selune in order to help the poor and try to absolve her sins

Yes, I got the point of it. You are challenging the players to get all this treasure back to town where there isn't really anything around to let them do that.

Do the players have an idea? If they can't think of anything, will you help them find something or just say "too bad, you can't take it all."

This all seems set up to actively deny them the whole hoard. Bring a cart? No you can't do that. Multiple trips? No, you can't get back becasue the creature who got them there is gone. As a DM, knowing the entire situation and all the hidden aspects, do you have an idea how they could transport it all?

[Fishyninja]

This all seems set up to actively deny them the whole hoard. Bring a cart? No you can't do that. Multiple trips? No, you can't get back becasue the creature who got them there is gone. As a DM, knowing the entire situation and all the hidden aspects, do you have an idea how they could transport it all?

It might be so, I am just running the module as it is written.

The dungeon is in a mountain 800ft above the ground, which required climbing to get up there (they worked around that), so that eliminates carts and horses for the immediate collection.
The module assumes the group already have a Bag of Holding, but they didn't so I threw one into the loot of a previous encounter.

I feel my players will probably load up the Bag of Holding to it's max capacity (it already has 110lbs in it). The Wizard has already exclaimed he can fly a few people down the mountain at a time so I think if they really want the stuff they'll get everyone off the mountain, make camp, go back to the town which is a days travel away or so, hire a few carts and workers, come back to mountain, get the wizard and maybe one or two of the party up with some sacks and fill those up until encumbrance. Rinse and repeat.

It will take time and resources and also there is the risk of random encounters. I am not aiming to be a Richard DM and dangle loot the party cannot have as some members have suggested, but I also just don't want to set a precedent with the players that carrying tens of thousands of coins is just as simple as writing numbers on your sheet.


Totally depends on your campaign. If it matter, track it. If it don't, then don't track. Sounds like the biggest consequence of not tracking encumbrance so far after a year is that someone carried some extra arrows or an extra backup weapon. That's hardly consequential in the big picture. (Please expand, if you realized earlier some players didn't track encumbrance, would there really be any big meaningful differences in your emergent story?) In comparison, the consequence of not tracking HP could be the difference of a PC death or not.

Ah, I understand now, sorry last post I read I was doing something else at the time and meaning escaped me. In regards tot he arrows being the only time, that is not the case it is just an example I have used where encumbrance has been part of a problem that the group needed to solve. Usually it is carrying either a captured criminal (the Wizard wants to be a magister) or a downed team member when they are out of healing resources. They got around the captured criminal part by buying a cart and installing a prison cage on the back. In regards to team members they now plan their attacks better and make sure that everyone has a potion within easy reach but because with this team member and their gear, they were too heavy to be carried by any members of the party, they toyed with the idea of two people carrying them then the group decided to make a travois (I think that is the correct term, the triangle shaped sled you can drag) to drag the downed member to a safe area before they could make camp.

[Keravath]

Just a quick comment - in 5e, a bag of holding can hold 25,000 coins. If the party only takes platinum and gold they already likely have enough to pay off their debts unless they have a huge debt. I don't know the game or the game world but usually debts might range to a few thousand gp typically and if that is the case here then the players can probably fit the necessary funds in their bag.

In addition, with the fly spell from the wizard, and only 1 day travel to town, they can go back to town, make a deposit at the "banker" you mentioned and then return for more coins. Assuming the dungeon is cleared of dangerous foes and this is a somewhat populated area only 1 day from a major settlement - the odds of encounters should be small (unless someone else learns about the treasure horde and wants some for themselves).

Alternatively, the mold earth cantrip could allow the wizard to very quickly bury the treasure and they could make multiple fast trips up and down the mountain burying the treasure until they can return it to town. (800' takes just over a minute with a fly speed of 60' - assuming that the treasure room is no more than another 1200 feet into the complex - and most D&D dungeons are MUCH smaller then it only takes 200 seconds or about 3 minutes to travel from the base of the mountain to the treasure horde). This means that casting fly in the treasure room allows the character to fly the bag of holding outside, empty it and fly back to the treasure room with one casting of the spell. They then fill the bag again, cast fly again and fly it out. Depending on how long it takes to shovel the coins into the bag, they can get 50,000 coins out of the treasure room in less than an hour.

So, I am not sure I see much issue getting the treasure out - encumbrance or not. In addition, if they want to be efficient they can leave non-essentials like backpack content at the base of the mountain and take empty backpacks which would allow each to carry at least 50 pounds extra which would be an additional 2500 coins/character on top of the bag of holding.

The bottom line is that the entire treasure scenario provides so little challenge that encumbrance is irrelevant so I don't really understand the obsession.

[Fishyninja]

The bottom line is that the entire treasure scenario provides so little challenge that encumbrance is irrelevant so I don't really understand the obsession.

Just wanting to use the rules we all agreed with originally. Wouldn't exactly call it an obsession.

[J.C.]

Bookkeeping Reduction Act

Or BRA as an acronym.

[Zhorn]

Bookkeeping Reduction Act

Or BRA as an acronym.
But as Fishyninja has covered; they are using a VTT and so it's all auto calculated.

[Tanarii]

Just a quick comment - in 5e, a bag of holding can hold 25,000 coins. If the party only takes platinum and gold they already likely have enough to pay off their debts unless they have a huge debt.
It worth noting that separating 25,000 of specific coins from mixed coins could easily take ... days? Not a problem if you control the treasure pile and surrounding terrain. Of course in that case, you can probably just take as many trips as needed any way.

Mentioning it because I often see the idea that players can just leave behind copper or even silver. Unless the previous owner presorted them for you, that may be easier said than done.

[noob]

You seem to have the same feelings as Pelle in regards to making the choices meaningful and I am doing that. Or at least attempting too.
To further expand the example I mentioned earlier. They could potentially find 50k in GP.
As also mentioned they could make multiple trips back to town, the problem is every trip requires an ascent and descent down a mountain with no path so there are risks of climbing etc etc, random encounters. It is also established that in my game that if you do not want to/cannot carry your cash, there is a bank in which your money can be deposited. Some have used this feature.


So you encourage not having the right carrying capacity by giving them extra encounters.
With your reward mechanic I can except them to carry 1 gold coin per trip while having all the rest of their allowed carrying capacity in equipment that they say is "absolutely needed" in order to maximise benefits by having 50000 occasions to have random encounters.

[Pelle]

Ah, I understand now, sorry last post I read I was doing something else at the time and meaning escaped me. In regards tot he arrows being the only time, that is not the case it is just an example I have used where encumbrance has been part of a problem that the group needed to solve. Usually it is carrying either a captured criminal (the Wizard wants to be a magister) or a downed team member when they are out of healing resources. They got around the captured criminal part by buying a cart and installing a prison cage on the back. In regards to team members they now plan their attacks better and make sure that everyone has a potion within easy reach but because with this team member and their gear, they were too heavy to be carried by any members of the party, they toyed with the idea of two people carrying them then the group decided to make a travois (I think that is the correct term, the triangle shaped sled you can drag) to drag the downed member to a safe area before they could make camp.

Allright, is there any moment in your campaign that you can point back to (also to your players), and say that if encumbrance rules were followed, the story of the campaign would have shifted to something completely different?

For example, if it turned out that not having enough ratios would have meant a detour to stock up on supplies, what would the consequence of missing one day? Would the cultists had time to summon Cthulhu, or would it not have mattered at all, due to dramatic logic and arriving at the middle of the ritual anyways.
If when having to carry a fallen party member, would the slower movement rate have any affect? Would the ooze have caught up with the party, or could the party just have dropped some useless equipment and kept the original speed without any consequences? Or would dropping the climbing equipment to keep up the speed meant that when the party reached the cliff face, they would not have been able to traverse it, leading to not being able to cure the curse on the downed party member in time?

If you are able to point back at something in your game that would be completely different with encumbrance, you will be much more likely able to convince your group. If the only change would have been that they should have 10 gp less due to dropping some uncessary equipment, they are going to say "I told you so, tracking encumbrance is pointless".

[Tanarii]

If you are able to point back at something in your game that would be completely different with encumbrance, you will be much more likely able to convince your group.Or they can just tell the one serious objector (not "the group") that these are the normal rules, they were explicitly called out as not being house ruled away in session 0, and everyone else is onboard both then and now with using these standard rules.

[Sol0botmate]

Just wanting to use the rules we all agreed with originally. Wouldn't exactly call it an obsession.

It's 5 pages thread about you asking us if you should or not ignore Encumbrance rules. We all have different approach to game as you can see. You will get different answers because we all DM and play differently. We also play with different people.

If my players were like suddenly "listen, we don't want to track Encumbrance because it's boring", I would say fine. Because Encumbrance being there or not have almost no impact on crucial things in game. It's not serious decision like Spell Points vs Slots, which absolutely impact every aspect of a game.

You have different approach to it than me obviously. But aks yourself this question: if you will say to them "no, you must follow Encumbrance" and they will still won't do it, will you end whole campaign and group over Encumbrance? Is there only one solution here- yours or theirs? Can't there be a compromise? I get they agreed on those rules - but it's not uncommon you start campaign with some rules (official or homebrew) and THEY JUST DON'T CLICK after some time, either because they cause trobules, are unbalanced or players don't like it or everybody thought it will be fun but it turns out it's not. I once allowed Spell Points and we agreed to switch it back to slots in the middle of game because it just didn't work well for game.

There is nothing wrong in dropping out rules in the middle of game if they don't work!

There is no easy solution there. If you can't find compromise, one side will have to back down. Sure, you are DM and you have last word- but it won't matter if you will have no group to play with.

Maybe consider "logical Encumbrance" instead of mechical. For example:

Everything that is "concealable" is not tracked (arrows, coins, bottles, torches etc.). Everything that would require actuall carrying (not being able to put in backpack etc.) require Athletic check if someone is able to carry it or passive Strength score, increasing DC as another item is being carried by that person. If 8 STR wizard wants to carry a 5,000 coins chest - obviously he can't but other party member with 14+ STR can. No numbers, no calculations etc. Just common sense.

Maybe that will be good middle ground. I don't know your players but that's what I can think of.

[Keravath]

Or they can just tell the one serious objector (not "the group") that these are the normal rules, they were explicitly called out as not being house ruled away in session 0, and everyone else is onboard both then and now with using these standard rules.

I agree. :) The counscientous objector to tracking encumbrance should have it pointed out that everyone agreed to use it at the start of the game and that since they are using Roll20 it quite conveniently prints out the total weight carried.

I've only ever found this to be an issue for strength 8 characters whose weight limit is 120lbs which wear medium armor (like half-plate) and a shield, a full backpack, and then want to carry a few thousand coins. These characters will often be over the 120lb weight limit due to the coins required. However, carrying coins is a pretty normal part of D&D play.

In addition, this situation is made worse if the character is the type that likes to carry a variety of weapons for just the right situation - slashing, piercing and bludgeoning weapons - ranged weapons etc - plus a variety of gear for obscure situations - climbing gear, caltrops, alchemist's fire, a range of potions, various tool sets (blacksmith+brewing+ ...). All of these add up in weight and if a character has 8 strength and medium armor then the reality is that they can't carry it all at once.

Overall encumbrance does place limits on what gear a character can have available which will affect game play. However, it doesn't require micromanagement of every single gram to achieve this. Every 0.1 to 0.5 lbs on the character sheet doesn't need to be accounted for - but the character/player does need to recognize the overall limitations imposed by their choice of 8 strength and play accordingly (which is the main point of the encumbrance system - as a tool for role playing how much your character can carry and dealing with the consequences of the character's choices).

I may not be in favor of a detailed accounting of every pound carried ... is 119 pounds that different from 121? However, at a higher level, that number does limit the flexibility of the character in terms of what they can transport and those limits should be incorporated from a role playing perspective and since everyone agreed to it in session 0 - it should be gently explained to all players that as soon as they get back to town, they will need to pair down their inventory to match up generally with their carrying capacity. This may mean making choices about what gear to carry or finding a bank or similar to store excess coins but that is simply part of the game they agreed to play.

However, ideally the shift to using it as intended should be "gentle" and the DM should ideally not make everyone drop all their excess possessions right away - give them a chance to drop them at a safe place where they might be able to get them later (this is often why characters buy houses in a game - it gives them a place to store their stuff :) ).

[KorvinStarmast]

The trouble I have always had is with figuring out how long in-game has passed as players do stuff outside of combat time. By having turns codified to be 10 minutes AND having specific things that can be done within one turn, that makes this far more doable for me, as a DM. Yeah, and the beauty of it is that you can turn that dial a bit depending on how quickly or slowly you want the clock to tick. :smallsmile: The other thing I saw one DM do was use a 12 sided die similarly to the 6, so that he didn't have to roll for random monsters as often.

[TigerT20]

If my players were like suddenly "listen, we don't want to track Encumbrance because it's boring", I would say fine. Because Encumbrance being there or not have almost no impact on crucial things in game. It's not serious decision like Spell Points vs Slots, which absolutely impact every aspect of a game.

You have different approach to it than me obviously. But aks yourself this question: if you will say to them "no, you must follow Encumbrance" and they will still won't do it, will you end whole campaign and group over Encumbrance? Is there only one solution here- yours or theirs? Can't there be a compromise? [B]I get they agreed on those rules - but it's not uncommon you start campaign with some rules (official or homebrew) and THEY JUST DON'T CLICK after some time, either because they cause trobules, are unbalanced or players don't like it or everybody thought it will be fun but it turns out it's not. I once allowed Spell Points and we agreed to switch it back to slots in the middle of game because it just didn't work well for game.

You make a good argument, but remember this is one player out of 6. This isn't the entire group dissenting; 4 players want to use the rules. 1 doesn't. 1 doesn't mind either way.

If in your spell points scenario, one player desperately wanted to use spell points instead of spell slots and had secretly continued to use them despite everyone agreeing not to, how would you respond?

[Corsair14]

As much as I add homebrew rules to make my campaigns more true to life(various armor and weapon related rules), I don't really do a whole lot with encumbrance. Too much a hassle to keep track of. Basically I tell my players they can carry what they realistically think they can carry. I let them hold one of my actual combat helms so they get an idea on how heavy armor is and why they cant wear it 24/7, might let them put on my full face sallet so they understand why their perception and sneaking abilities have disadvantage and penalties attached and so on. If a player appears to be turning into a walking closet of gear I might ask him to tally up how much everything he is carrying weighs. "But its just a suit of chainmail..." Here, hold my short sleeve shirt of mail. Wearing it correctly so the weight is distributed and mostly rests on your hips is one thing, looting the raiding party and trying to take all of their chainmail rolled up in your backpack is something different.

[Unoriginal]

It's 5 pages thread about you asking us if you should or not ignore Encumbrance rules.

Pretty sure the thread was about what to do with a couple of players who weren't following the rule.