Log in

View Full Version : Original System Supply Dice - system-agnostic way of tracking the things you hate tracking



Vogie
2023-09-21, 03:47 PM
I'm one of those DMs who are annoyed by consumables. I like the concept of consumables, because as a DM I think it is important that your players can run out of things if they're not in town... but hate most of the executions that I see of it.

So this idea is essentially using a variant of the Psionic Talent dice from the UA Wild Talent feat. For those who don't recall, it was a feat that fueled a couple of psychic abilities with a d6 that would grow and shrink based on the use. If you roll the maximum amount, you are overextending yourself and the die shrinks a step (from a d6 to a d4). If you roll a 1, on the other hand, you are preserving power for later, represented by the die increasing one step (from a d6 to a d8).

For this implementation, we're giving the dice a bit more latitude - all you have to do is roll a 3 or higher to have not run low on the resource in question. This means that the more a character invests in a resource, the more likely it's going to last for a long time. However, the resource steps down whenever you roll a 1 or 2 on that dice - meaning that each time you use that resource at the 1d4 level, you have a 50% chance of dropping to 1, which would mean they have precisely 1 use left. 1 use may be a rest for things like rations or healing supplies, or 1 more combat encounter for things like ammunition

The dice steps would be d20, d12, d10, d8, d6, d4 and 1.

Initially, this will be used for:

Food
Water
Arrows, Bolts and Bullets
Non-magical healing implements such as healing kit charges, bandages, antitoxins, and the like


Each time a consumable resource is used in a generic period of time, the dice is rolled. This includes

At the end of each combat encounter for ammunition such as arrows, bolts or bullets where that resource was used more than once.
During a rest where natural healing is used, such as when hit dice are rolled or regained in 5e or the Resting Exploration action in PF2e.
During a period of time in extreme environments, such as bitter cold or punishing heat.

For example, at the end of a combat round where a healthy ranger relied solely on their bow, and the badly-wounded wizard, who had eventually ran out of spell slots, used their crossbow once, only the Ranger would roll their supply dice for their consumed arrows

Interactions in the wild

When using a trained level or higher Survival check (or equivalent) to go out and find additional food or water, once the DC is met or exceeded, they can choose one supply dice in their party to increase by one step (for example, if the ranger has a d10 of food remaining, but the wizard has only a d4 left, they may be increasing the wizards' supply rather than their own). A critical success would increase the supply dice for an additional person.
Similarly, increasing the die size of mundane ammunition, if one has the ability to do so, a successful check would increase their mundane ammo supply by one step and a critical success would move it two steps.
When using a Survival check (or equivalent) by an untrained PC is using it in a way to "live off the land" instead of using their supply, a successful roll will give a -1 modifier to a Supply check.
When rolling a supply check to split one PC's Supplies with multiple people, they would take -3 for the first person, and -2 for each additional person beyond the first, provided that the total able to be rolled is at least 2. This means a PC with a d10 supply die could provide up to a party of four once (as themselves and three party members would be a -7 modifier).
When using a cooking skill (or equivalent) where the trained PC takes additional time to set up a campfire and use cooking tools, the roll can be made with a +1 modifier (thus only decreasing if a 1 is rolled). There isn't an untrained equivalent, only for those PCs that invested into that cooking skill at the expense of other skills.


Then comes the obvious requirement - how do I then fill up when we go back to town? This is still in flux, but right now I'm think the value will be an amount of currency equal to your level to go up a single dice size. This would very wildly depending on the system as

In 5e, Rations 5 silver a day (5s for 1 day's rations) for food and 4 silver a day (2 waterskins of water for 1 gallon, 2 sp each), resulting in 90 sp (9gp) for a tenday (their week equivalent); where as in Pathfinder 2e 4 sp is a week's rations and 5 copper for a day's water, resulting in a 7-day week being 7.5 sp.
In 5e, arrows are 1gp for 20; in PF2e it's 2sp for 20
In 5e, bullets are 3gp for 10, but are relatively rare; in PF2e, where there's an entire gunslinger class, it's 2sp for 10

To me, all of that is relatively asinine. To make everything relatively simple, I would expect filling the consumables would be between 1 gp (PF2e) to 10 gp (5e) each to fill up to a d20 - It would depend on if your system (or campaign) is relatively currency-light, or up to the "What do I do with all this useless gold?" economies. Things like Water would likely be refilled for free

If the party has the ability to purchase things in bulk, such as having a barrel of water on their cart, you could represent those types of things with multiple dice - a barrel of water could have about 2d12 amounts of water, and each time they "refill" one supply die size it'd be rolled with a target number of 3 or higher, making it relatively long-lasting. You could do the same if you're trying to have a more gritty game, where something like a felled game animal might provide 2d8 worth of rations. This system is relatively similar to Torchbearer's treasure system, where all loot and treasure has a variable value representing the worth of things as you sell them - 1d6 is the equivalent to a pouch full of copper, 2d6 is a pouch full of silver, 3d6 is a gem or pouch full of gold, et cetera.

Once a home base is created, the party could be able to fill up certain things all the way for free when they return to their home/ship/guildhouse/tavern/et cetera.

This system could also be expanded to include:

Generic thrown weapons (nonmagical throwing knives, javelins, etc), with the supply die representing the ability to be retrieved at the end of the battle
Magical Components in a Pouch (which, while thematic, is a nonbo with things like wands, orbs and staves), or materials to make basic poisons, if that's a common
Spending money, although this would require a complete rewrite of how purchasing things work. This would be useful with any sort of abstracted
Supply costs for failures during the exploration phase - as a sort of non-combat penalty for poor rolls (your campfire spreads, you use a step of your water to put it out; you lose a die step of ammo when you almost fall off the ledge; and so on)

Grod_The_Giant
2023-09-21, 05:25 PM
The parts of me that like clever mechanics and dice-as-resources quite enjoy this idea--it would be a fine way of tracking supplies for a campaign where that kind of thing is important. But...I don't think it'll do much to alleviate the parts of consumables that are annoying. "I have 20 arrows" is fiddley, but it's also intuitive--it doesn't consume any brain cells, to torture a metaphor. Resource dice still require you to keep track of a bunch of values, and based on your examples will also require you to keep track of a lot of modifiers.

It might work better if you switched to a single set of resource dice for the party, rolled once at the end of the day. That still gives you the element of tension, but involves much less to keep track of--you could have the one guy who enjoys resource tracking deal with it while everyone else gets to relax, or you could give everyone a single resource (provisions for the Ranger*, ammo for the Fighter, medical supplies for the Cleric, etc). Parties are going to share resources anyway, so there's not much point keeping track of individual supplies. And having a single check while everyone's gathered around the campfire in the evening feels narratively appropriate; it's a downtime sort of thing to be thinking about.

Either way, I feel like doing the 5e thing and replacing a bunch of separate modifiers with advantage/disadvantage would be really helpful. Are you in a lush woodland with a Ranger? Roll with advantage. Are you stuck in a desert with a bunch of city-slickers? Disadvantage.




*Or whatever the system's role-by-role breakdown might be.

Deepbluediver
2023-09-23, 10:01 AM
I like the idea of not-tracking stuff like ammunition and spell-reagents. Travel-supplies are a different discussion IMO, because I think foraging and related checks to deal with the environment and weather actually enhance the game, but all the little piddling stuff that's related to basic abilities can go away.

That's why when I run a game I don't require players to track ammunition at all- it's just assumed that if you have a bow, crossbow, sling, etc, then you also have ammunition for it. Past about level 3 or so it takes a trivial amount of gold, but it's always an annoying little mosquito buzzing in your ear that you can't just take a feat to forget about.

I look at it like this: imagine your party finds a sword (just a regular longsword) with a special property called "durability". Every time you make an attack, durability goes down by 1, and if it reaches 0 you can't use the sword to make attacks any more. You can increase durability by 1 for a cost of 1 silver, but it's capped at 30 so you can't just dump several hundred gold into it at once and never have to worry about it again. I think most players would agree this is a terribly weapon and try to get rid of it ASAP. Don't believe me? Look at a game like Zelda: Breath of the Wild which is almost universally acclaimed, but one of the few consistent complaints is about the weapon degradation system.
But if you replace "sword" with "bow" and "durability" with "arrows" in that previous paragraph, then that's basically ammunition-tracking for ranged weapons in a nutshell, and everyone just goes along with it.

So honestly I think your idea is neat and workable, but I would go 1 step farther.
Now to be fair, not tracking ammunition SOUNDS a little odd at first, and some players are definitely weirded out, as if they are afraid of what other stranger rules you are going to introduce. But once the game actually starts? No one cares. I've never heard anyone voice a complaint like "oh this game is pretty good but it would be just a little better if someone in our party was constantly worried that they would forget to restock at the next town and suddenly found themselves unable to make basic attacks".

Also, you can definitely buy 14, 16, & 18 sided dice, if you want to make your progression smoother: https://www.amazon.com/Black-Set-Unusual-Dice-d14/dp/B00OBQLC38#:~:text=Includes%20a%2014%20sided%2C%20 16,and%201%20inch%20in%20diameter.
Failing that, there are lots of free dice-rollers that let you input whatever size dice you want; you could make a d137 if you wanted to.

LibraryOgre
2023-09-23, 11:14 AM
I am tempted by adapting PbtA's method of ammo tracking, and expanding it to supplies, as well.

You have, say, 3 units of arrows. That will let you shoot arrows more or less indefinitely, unless you make some defined sort of failure. In D&D, this might be "roll a 1 on the attack", or a critical failure, or whatever. You still have to "reload", but don't have to count each arrow and biscuit.

Grod_The_Giant
2023-09-23, 11:53 AM
Now to be fair, not tracking ammunition SOUNDS a little odd at first, and some players are definitely weirded out, as if they are afraid of what other stranger rules you are going to introduce.
Really? I feel like, if anything, the opposite is true--I'd get strange looks if I told players they should take care to track ammo.

PhoenixPhyre
2023-09-23, 11:57 AM
I am tempted by adapting PbtA's method of ammo tracking, and expanding it to supplies, as well.

You have, say, 3 units of arrows. That will let you shoot arrows more or less indefinitely, unless you make some defined sort of failure. In D&D, this might be "roll a 1 on the attack", or a critical failure, or whatever. You still have to "reload", but don't have to count each arrow and biscuit.

I'd strongly not recommend doing anything on a nat 1. Because that makes trained combatants worse than untrained ones--a 20th level 5e fighter makes 4-8 attacks per round. The chances of running out go way up. And that's bad-feel.

Instead, I'd invert it and add choice--you can choose to

a) turn a nat 1 into a hit or a hit into a crit, but if you do, you expend one ammo.
b) max the damage on a crit, but expend ammo.
c) expend an ammo to succeed (or gain advantage) on a check where it makes sense--wedging arrows into a door, success at a cost (ie you didn't fall, but you did lose some arrows out of your quiver), etc.

So expending ammo is a choice, but one with consequences. You can actually run yourself out of arrows, but every expenditure does something meaningful. If you have the appropriate skills, you can (slowly) regenerate arrows during rests, or you can restock in town.

Vogie
2023-09-25, 01:15 PM
I am tempted by adapting PbtA's method of ammo tracking, and expanding it to supplies, as well.

You have, say, 3 units of arrows. That will let you shoot arrows more or less indefinitely, unless you make some defined sort of failure. In D&D, this might be "roll a 1 on the attack", or a critical failure, or whatever. You still have to "reload", but don't have to count each arrow and biscuit.

What makes the 3 units of ammo go down in PbtA?



c) expend an ammo to succeed (or gain advantage) on a check where it makes sense--wedging arrows into a door, success at a cost (ie you didn't fall, but you did lose some arrows out of your quiver), etc.


This is a fascinating idea, and I'll have to make sure I factor in player shenanigans, because I can 100% see one of them pulling something like this.

LibraryOgre
2023-09-26, 12:48 PM
What makes the 3 units of ammo go down in PbtA?


In PBtA, ammo count usually goes down when you roll a failure or a "Yes, but". It is an option to sacrifice ammo, at times, to improve your situation.

Deepbluediver
2023-09-26, 08:13 PM
Really? I feel like, if anything, the opposite is true--I'd get strange looks if I told players they should take care to track ammo.
Depends on your group, I guess. I think if you're brand new to D&D then it probably goes over a lot easier- never bring it up with the players unless they ask first and then tell them that doesn't matter.
But oldschool D&D has you tracking exactly how many dabs of bat-guano and how many pieces of bent copper wire you have at all times, and you can't use certain abilities without it.

LibraryOgre
2023-09-28, 09:40 AM
Depends on your group, I guess. I think if you're brand new to D&D then it probably goes over a lot easier- never bring it up with the players unless they ask first and then tell them that doesn't matter.
But oldschool D&D has you tracking exactly how many dabs of bat-guano and how many pieces of bent copper wire you have at all times, and you can't use certain abilities without it.

It's a shift in resource counting, really; the bean-counting of TD&D is good at low-level play, when you're young and poor, but a more abstract approach to wealth works better, IMO, at higher levels of power, when the price of a meal shouldn't be big, but the price of a castle should be a major concern.

Vogie
2023-10-02, 10:02 AM
But oldschool D&D has you tracking exactly how many dabs of bat-guano and how many pieces of bent copper wire you have at all times, and you can't use certain abilities without it.

The thing about that old system is it required such specific layers of potential gotchas - "No fireballs for you, no one in this desert have ever seen a bat, regardless of the size of your purse" or whatnot. Like, I'm all for spell components as long as they are interesting and actual give something. I'm surprised that no one has created a Little Alchemy-esque system for a ttrpg so you have a little minigame to put together your spell components.

Deepbluediver
2023-10-02, 08:54 PM
It's a shift in resource counting, really; the bean-counting of TD&D is good at low-level play, when you're young and poor, but a more abstract approach to wealth works better, IMO, at higher levels of power, when the price of a meal shouldn't be big, but the price of a castle should be a major concern.
I suppose, but while low-level spells might require bat-guano or a single copper piece, high level spells might require something like a perfectly carved crystal figurine, 5000gp ruby, or the tooth of an elder black-dragon. So it doesn't exactly go away, it just scales with your level, like CR. (except that the writers kinda-sorta seemed to forget about reagents with higher level spells because in 3.5 classic casters went completely off the rails anyway, but IMO that seems more like neglect than an intentional design choice)

Anywho, I feel like there should be a better way of making low-level players care about their WBL without locking certain basic abilities behind a paywall. I have some ideas about that, but it involves reworking D&D at a more fundamental level and I don't want to derail the OP's thread.



The thing about that old system is it required such specific layers of potential gotchas - "No fireballs for you, no one in this desert have ever seen a bat, regardless of the size of your purse" or whatnot. Like, I'm all for spell components as long as they are interesting and actual give something. I'm surprised that no one has created a Little Alchemy-esque system for a ttrpg so you have a little minigame to put together your spell components.
Yeah, I agree that if you're going to play Accountants & Audits instead of Dungeons & Dragons, there should be some kind of more powerful and/or more flavorful benefit. I've toyed with the idea of something like letting reagents boost your spellcraft check or spell-save DC, or giving you free metamagic, but it always seems to be a very fine line between offering a benefit and effectively REQUIRING that players utilize it to be at their most potent. And it's something that melee-classes don't have to worry about at all, which kinda discourages a whole lot of people from even attempting to play their OC Gandalf or Merlin or Harry Potter expy, etc.