So basically players should never have an opinion on the table they are part of ? They should never say : i do not like this. Or : I do not find this fun.
They should just shut up and always say yes ?
A game isnt only what the DM decides or prepare. A good table is a cooperative experience where EVERYONE contributes to some degree. Its a cooperative experience.
sure. players can make suggestions but the dm decides. thats just how it works. also with something as silly as ammo a player do is not wild about it can easily make a build that does not have to worry about it.
So basically, you would prefer to keep a rule that everyone dodge by switching character rather than forgetting about it to allow your players to play what they prefer ?
How about this. How about a table where people that would want to track it do it, and thoses that dont… dont ? What is the worst that can happen from that ?
Players, in my experience, never want to accept an increase in difficulty—but they also get bored when things are too easy. The DM’s job is to create problems to solve, not let the players do whatever they want.
Obviously if nobody in the group wants to track arrows, they shouldn’t have to, but not tracking ammo because it’s tedious is like not tracking spell slots or Channel Divinity for the same reason. Scarcity is a balance consideration.
The differences between spell slots and ammo is that you cannot have 30 spell slots on you at level 1, running out of spell slots is expected because you have so few of them, making tracking them easier since it actually matters, and you cannot buy your way into more easily just like that.
They are both resources, but dont go and say that an arrow is worth a spell slot.
You also cannot get spell slots back by tediously scourging the battlefield or looting basic as fuck soldiers.
And we come back to this question : what is the WORST SHIT to happen to a game if you remove the coubting of normal arrows and simply give everyon an infinite quiver that cannot be sold for gold ?
Because up to now, nobody came with a decent answer to this. Im still waiting.
What’s the worst thing that could happen if you remove tracking of spell slots? I don’t understand the emphasis you’re putting on numbers. It’s very reasonable to expect to run out of arrows in a campaign that includes any element of survivalism.
Well, every caster becomes more or less 3 times more powerful ? Because spells are so much better than cantrips ? Because if there wasnt any limits on spell slots, then who wouldnt make a caster ?
When I play a caster, my main question is : when is it worth it to burn a precious spell slot.
But I never EVER saw or heard of a ranged player using a bow or crossbow thinking : is it really worth using a regular ammo here ?
It sounds to me like you run campaigns where you have ready access to ammunition, so sure, maybe it doesn’t matter so much for your group. I run campaigns where it might be five or more long rests between shops. Running out of ammo is extremely possible, and people do consider it as an exhaustible resource.
Hmmm… survival campaigns actually IS a good reason to make ammo counting a thing.
But how about this. Do you limit inventory of merchands, or can they load up on 150 arrows for 10 gold every 5 long rest ?
Remember. Average fights are 4 rounds, so 4 to 8 arrows per fight if they only do that. Meaning if you have 3 to 5 fights per long rest, that is maximum 200 arrows for 5 long rests worth of fights if you ever only shoot arrows all the time and fight a fuckton.
And its possible to load up on so many arrows. They are cheap, light and easy to craft. Meaning it becomes a hassle to take care more than a real challenge.
So, do you make them scarce, or worth more than per the PHB ? Or doing something else to tighten up the arrows available ?
Sorry, I did a mistake in my calculus. I didnt included the arrows you can pick back up and the ones that you find on enemies. So its not 200, its more like between 50 and 100 depending of the kind of enemy you fight. So way easier.
that is what happens already its just the dm of that table is the one making the final call or not I guess if you guys have a dm that just does everything by consensus. the way rpgs work though is the dm decides what rules to use and how to implement them using as much or as little player input as they feel like.
It depends on if the dm expected ammo to be tracked. If one player is doing it but the dm does not require it then who cares. if the dm requires it then they will mention it to the player not tracking or track it themselves. My guess if the dm did not make it pretty clear in the first session or two that they are likely not tracking it.
ok focus. thats a new question. but i will answer it and if you come up with a new variant it will require a new answer. the result in the rules of most games is a loss of money on the side of the ones tracking vs not tracking (and further the ammo tracker can run out of ammo while the non tracker has an infinite supply). essentially the non trackers don’t have to buy ammo and in most rpgs money is a big element of power and balance. Heck tracking is only the start of it. I assume ammo will be tracked if the default rules indicate it which is like 99% of the games I come across. If the dm says I don’t need to I don’t. But if its tracked then after combat I ask if I can retrieve ammo. some dms will allow all ammo to be retrieved (which actually makes tracking pretty pointless). some will rule crit fails cannot be retrieved. still others will have you make some sort of skill roll that determines how much ammo you can recycle and finally some will not allow any ammo retrieving.
And you know what ? You are entirely right. Thoses tracking ammo will have to shell out gold that thoses that dont… wont have to.
But here is the thing. Most fights lasts 4 rounds in average. At low levels, it means 4 arrows per fight.
And arrows are 20 for 1 gold.
So, the money difference in most fights is : 1 gold piece for every 5 fights.
Its nothing. For reference, the smallest health potion is worth 50 gold pieces. Which represents 1000 arrows. Which represents more or less 250 fights. More than a whole campaign.
You are correct. But the thing is, that amount of money is negligeable.
Thank you for the straight answer. Its just not big enough to change my mind when I could give an extra 5 gold pieces to thoses that prefer to track ammo and be good for inter player balance for months of playing time.
To answer your question: power imbalance in the group since there are those who run out of ammo and those who don’t. It’s not hard to understand “some rules apply to some but not all”
Also those who do count will become frustrated since their book keeping isnt valued. Also their immersion gets broken when they know that the other factions theoretically don’t have any ammunition left yet they still fire.
So basically players should never have an opinion on the table they are part of ? They should never say : i do not like this. Or : I do not find this fun.
They should just shut up and always say yes ?
A game isnt only what the DM decides or prepare. A good table is a cooperative experience where EVERYONE contributes to some degree. Its a cooperative experience.
sure. players can make suggestions but the dm decides. thats just how it works. also with something as silly as ammo a player do is not wild about it can easily make a build that does not have to worry about it.
So basically, you would prefer to keep a rule that everyone dodge by switching character rather than forgetting about it to allow your players to play what they prefer ?
How about this. How about a table where people that would want to track it do it, and thoses that dont… dont ? What is the worst that can happen from that ?
Players, in my experience, never want to accept an increase in difficulty—but they also get bored when things are too easy. The DM’s job is to create problems to solve, not let the players do whatever they want.
Obviously if nobody in the group wants to track arrows, they shouldn’t have to, but not tracking ammo because it’s tedious is like not tracking spell slots or Channel Divinity for the same reason. Scarcity is a balance consideration.
The differences between spell slots and ammo is that you cannot have 30 spell slots on you at level 1, running out of spell slots is expected because you have so few of them, making tracking them easier since it actually matters, and you cannot buy your way into more easily just like that.
They are both resources, but dont go and say that an arrow is worth a spell slot.
You also cannot get spell slots back by tediously scourging the battlefield or looting basic as fuck soldiers.
And we come back to this question : what is the WORST SHIT to happen to a game if you remove the coubting of normal arrows and simply give everyon an infinite quiver that cannot be sold for gold ?
Because up to now, nobody came with a decent answer to this. Im still waiting.
What’s the worst thing that could happen if you remove tracking of spell slots? I don’t understand the emphasis you’re putting on numbers. It’s very reasonable to expect to run out of arrows in a campaign that includes any element of survivalism.
Well, every caster becomes more or less 3 times more powerful ? Because spells are so much better than cantrips ? Because if there wasnt any limits on spell slots, then who wouldnt make a caster ?
When I play a caster, my main question is : when is it worth it to burn a precious spell slot.
But I never EVER saw or heard of a ranged player using a bow or crossbow thinking : is it really worth using a regular ammo here ?
It sounds to me like you run campaigns where you have ready access to ammunition, so sure, maybe it doesn’t matter so much for your group. I run campaigns where it might be five or more long rests between shops. Running out of ammo is extremely possible, and people do consider it as an exhaustible resource.
Hmmm… survival campaigns actually IS a good reason to make ammo counting a thing.
But how about this. Do you limit inventory of merchands, or can they load up on 150 arrows for 10 gold every 5 long rest ?
Remember. Average fights are 4 rounds, so 4 to 8 arrows per fight if they only do that. Meaning if you have 3 to 5 fights per long rest, that is maximum 200 arrows for 5 long rests worth of fights if you ever only shoot arrows all the time and fight a fuckton.
And its possible to load up on so many arrows. They are cheap, light and easy to craft. Meaning it becomes a hassle to take care more than a real challenge.
So, do you make them scarce, or worth more than per the PHB ? Or doing something else to tighten up the arrows available ?
Sorry, I did a mistake in my calculus. I didnt included the arrows you can pick back up and the ones that you find on enemies. So its not 200, its more like between 50 and 100 depending of the kind of enemy you fight. So way easier.
that is what happens already its just the dm of that table is the one making the final call or not I guess if you guys have a dm that just does everything by consensus. the way rpgs work though is the dm decides what rules to use and how to implement them using as much or as little player input as they feel like.
But you didnt answered me. I asked : what would happen if some would track ammo and some dont in the same party ?
You are that DM and your players ask you this. What do you say ?
It depends on if the dm expected ammo to be tracked. If one player is doing it but the dm does not require it then who cares. if the dm requires it then they will mention it to the player not tracking or track it themselves. My guess if the dm did not make it pretty clear in the first session or two that they are likely not tracking it.
Still not answering me. I will try one last time. Focus please :
What is the worst that would happen if the players that wants to track it do it and thoses that dont dont ?
ok focus. thats a new question. but i will answer it and if you come up with a new variant it will require a new answer. the result in the rules of most games is a loss of money on the side of the ones tracking vs not tracking (and further the ammo tracker can run out of ammo while the non tracker has an infinite supply). essentially the non trackers don’t have to buy ammo and in most rpgs money is a big element of power and balance. Heck tracking is only the start of it. I assume ammo will be tracked if the default rules indicate it which is like 99% of the games I come across. If the dm says I don’t need to I don’t. But if its tracked then after combat I ask if I can retrieve ammo. some dms will allow all ammo to be retrieved (which actually makes tracking pretty pointless). some will rule crit fails cannot be retrieved. still others will have you make some sort of skill roll that determines how much ammo you can recycle and finally some will not allow any ammo retrieving.
Finally a straight answer.
And you know what ? You are entirely right. Thoses tracking ammo will have to shell out gold that thoses that dont… wont have to.
But here is the thing. Most fights lasts 4 rounds in average. At low levels, it means 4 arrows per fight.
And arrows are 20 for 1 gold.
So, the money difference in most fights is : 1 gold piece for every 5 fights.
Its nothing. For reference, the smallest health potion is worth 50 gold pieces. Which represents 1000 arrows. Which represents more or less 250 fights. More than a whole campaign.
You are correct. But the thing is, that amount of money is negligeable.
Thank you for the straight answer. Its just not big enough to change my mind when I could give an extra 5 gold pieces to thoses that prefer to track ammo and be good for inter player balance for months of playing time.
To answer your question: power imbalance in the group since there are those who run out of ammo and those who don’t. It’s not hard to understand “some rules apply to some but not all”
Also those who do count will become frustrated since their book keeping isnt valued. Also their immersion gets broken when they know that the other factions theoretically don’t have any ammunition left yet they still fire.
If you allow this as a DM you fucking failed!
But if its by choice, whats the problem ? You just have to say : I no longer to want to track ammo, and boom you are good.
If you want to track ammo, manage to run out, how hypocrite is it to be jealous of thoses that never wanted to in the first place ?