Bulk is bad.


Doomsday Dawn Game Master Feedback

1 to 50 of 206 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

13 people marked this as a favorite.

Every single one of my party members and I hate bulk.

Everyone in my party can hold about 1 weapon, 1 piece of armor and maybe a shield and then they're at the limit of their bulk.

Back in PF1 you could easily carry a couple of weapons, armor and some adventuring tools without hitting encumbrance if you have a 12 strength.

The carrying capacity needs to be at least doubled.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I had the opposite issue - For the most part, I found the bulk rules much friendlier than weight. A weapon is 1 bulk (usually 2 for a two-handed weapon), armor is 1 to 2 bulk (3 if it's heavy armor) and your other total gear will probably add up to 1 bulk (19 Light items count as 1 bulk). So we're looking at 5 to 6 bulk for even the more martial characters, and they're likely going to have a 12 STR or higher, so they're likely doing fine. The more dexterous or low-equipment characters will probably have about 3 bulk used max, leaving 1 to 2 bulk free.

Comparing this to my PF1 characters, I often times barely had enough encumbrance to carry anything but 1 weapon, my armor, and my starting gear, unless my STR was a 15 or higher. The Handy Haversack was the first magic item I sought, REGARDLESS of my character's abilities, because I didn't want to be encumbered the second I found 100 coins.

At worst, I would say they could revise the weight limit to say you are UNencumbered up to 5 + STR mod, and above that, you being being encumbered. That extra +1 will give most people a little extra breathing room.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
ENHenry wrote:
Comparing this to my PF1 characters, I often times barely had enough encumbrance to carry anything but 1 weapon, my armor, and my starting gear, unless my STR was a 15 or higher. The Handy Haversack was the first magic item I sought, REGARDLESS of my character's abilities, because I didn't want to be encumbered the second I found 100 coins.

Minor bag of holding, 1000gp. 2 traits that boost carry. various other items, mundane and magic, that boost carry. heck, there is a skill use to increase carry. In PF1, with a little bit of effort even single digit str PC's can carry plenty.

Not so much for the new version. JUST look at simple Artisan’s tools and Snare kits. 8 bulk!!! SO you're looking at 16 str to JUST carry that. Even when we look at alchemist kits and musical instruments and tools, they weigh as much as weapons and armor. An alchemist with a chain shirt, a club, and their kit and book is encumbered before they make ANY alchemical items unless they invest in more strength.

Envoy's Alliance

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Disagreement here: I like bulk a ton better than the other system from PF1. It's easier to track and is actually kind of *fun* to track if you can believe it, and it makes strength pretty valuable to non-martials. A level 4 cleric with a ton of kits, 16 strength, heavy armor, 2 weapons, a staff, and a heavy shield did just fine by just taking the hefty hauler general feat.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

My issue with it is that it only scales +1 bulk per modifier. In PF1 it didn't have 1-1 scaling as your str went up, which meant that really strong people could carry considerably more than not strong people. And could serve as "the carrier of stuff" for the party.

Now, an 18str character can carry 4 more bulky items than a 10str character (rather than 67 more lbs)... It doesn't feel good.

Especially if you aren't playing pfs style where any loot you find doesn't count towards your carry limit. It means you've most likely only got room for 0-4 pieces of loot per party member (unless you've got a str based monk I suppose). The party is practically required to get a pack mule if they want to be able to carry loot.

I realize it may be a bit more realistic that a single character can't carry 10 longswords and 20 clubs out of the dungeon without any problems. But it's certainly less fun to not be able to do so.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
shiboito wrote:
It's easier to track and is actually kind of *fun* to track if you can believe it

I really can't see me EVER having fun with it. As to easier... I never found using actual, factual weights the least bit hard or onerous so even if we assume it's easier, that's IMO the slightest possible advantage over the super simple that it was.


Demonskunk wrote:

Every single one of my party members and I hate bulk.

Everyone in my party can hold about 1 weapon, 1 piece of armor and maybe a shield and then they're at the limit of their bulk.

Back in PF1 you could easily carry a couple of weapons, armor and some adventuring tools without hitting encumbrance if you have a 12 strength.

The carrying capacity needs to be at least doubled.

A weapon: 1 bulk

Armor: 1-2 bulk
A heavy steel shield: 1 bulk

That is hardly at 6 bulk (str 12) it just means you can't ignore strength in PF2 like you could in PF1.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

I find bulk to be fairly useless.

Bulk : Add up numbers to measure encumbrance.

Weight : Add up numbers to measure encumbrance. Since it is a real-world measurement, you can more easily lookup/adjudicate items from the real world and you can perform other real-world calculations.

That is, in terms of mechanics and complexity, bulk and weight are the same, but bulk provides no useful comparison.

Both Bulk and Weight fail to cover volume. Admittedly, volume is only really needed when you start talking about filling a cart, wagon, or ship, since they are less likely to be limited by weight than space.

In game terms, I'd skip either one unless your character sheet is automated (Hero Lab) or you had a plot-related reason to care.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Demonskunk wrote:

Every single one of my party members and I hate bulk.

Everyone in my party can hold about 1 weapon, 1 piece of armor and maybe a shield and then they're at the limit of their bulk.

Back in PF1 you could easily carry a couple of weapons, armor and some adventuring tools without hitting encumbrance if you have a 12 strength.

The carrying capacity needs to be at least doubled.

A weapon: 1 bulk

Armor: 1-2 bulk
A heavy steel shield: 1 bulk

That is hardly at 6 bulk (str 12) it just means you can't ignore strength in PF2 like you could in PF1.

You forgot

Rope (pretty important adventuring gear): 1 bulk
Ranged weapon + 10-20 ammo: 1 bulk + 1-2L or 2-3L if you go for a sling

Then, for some classes:
Alchemist tools: 2 Bulk
Repair kit: 1 bulk
Healer's kit: 1 bulk
Spellbook: 1 bulk

And again, even if you decided to go adventuring without any rope, means to attack at range, any L bulk items like rations or torches, and without one of those kits you'd only have 2-3 bulk left (depending on your armor). Which means you get to carry 2-3 B worth of loot and that's it. Your big fighter friend who also doesn't bring anything else helpful? Only 5 B worth of loot.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I actually like Bulk as a concept, as it is at least theoretically supposed to account both weight and volume and my players find it way easier to track. BUT:

* The listed limit of Str in Bulk should be your light load, not your heavy load. Heavy load should be twice this.
* Anything which cannot fit in a belt pouch should not be L bulk.
* Give clearer guidelines as to real world items.
* Make it very clear what the bulk of a person is for carry / ride / drag purposes!


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
* Anything which cannot fit in a belt pouch should not be L bulk.

Yep. Right now the pouch can fit 4 L items and a potion, a javelin and a light shield are all L. Something is WAY off when these things have an equivalent weight x unwieldiness factor.


Kind of random but I kind of wish athletics added to carry capacity if only in a small way.

I do prefer weight to bulk. just so I can say I'm on topic.


I don't see how carrying stuff is in any way a problem. Backpacks can carry 4 bulk and don't weigh you down at all. Sacks can carry 8 Bulk and are only L bulk when carried. Plus Satchels can carry 2 Bulk and also don't weigh you down at all. Carrying stuff is super easy now.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think some people just feel that some bulk items just don't make sense to fit in other storage spaces from shape and dimension alone. I Think about it kind of like how video games would give you a back pack and then you could put a bazooka assault rifle etc etc all at once in it even though its just a back pack.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Rameth wrote:
I don't see how carrying stuff is in any way a problem. Backpacks can carry 4 bulk and don't weigh you down at all. Sacks can carry 8 Bulk and are only L bulk when carried. Plus Satchels can carry 2 Bulk and also don't weigh you down at all. Carrying stuff is super easy now.

Note that none of these actually increase your carrying capacity. A backpack is simply a container that holds up to 4 bulk of items so you have somewhere to keep them; if fully loaded, it still counts 4 bulk against your limit.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

Can someone explains why bulk exists at all?

Weight is often a two-digit number; I can see an advantage to simplify it to a single-digit number (and call it "bulk"). But at the moment you add another digit after the decimal point, the advantage of the concept vanish. Even if you call this new digit "L", it doesn't change anything - a character with Str 10 can carry 5.9 Bulk in Path 2 or 33 lbl in Path 1, both are a two-digit numbers.

The end result is the same complexity, but now you don't know if you can carry a corpse, you don't know how many person are needed to carry a piano, you don't know if you can insert a card in your bag of holding, etc. It's the same as before, with more problems.

I can't figure what is the design goal behind bulk.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
Rameth wrote:
I don't see how carrying stuff is in any way a problem. Backpacks can carry 4 bulk and don't weigh you down at all. Sacks can carry 8 Bulk and are only L bulk when carried. Plus Satchels can carry 2 Bulk and also don't weigh you down at all. Carrying stuff is super easy now.
Note that none of these actually increase your carrying capacity. A backpack is simply a container that holds up to 4 bulk of items so you have somewhere to keep them; if fully loaded, it still counts 4 bulk against your limit.

Are you sure? I assumed that wearing a backpack made carrying the items easier and would therefore increase the bulk you are able to carry. It makes sense, as trying to carry 40 pounds in your hands vs putting it in a backpack are two very different experiences. Even if you weren't able to physically carry 40 pounds you'd be able to carry a backpack with said amount.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Containers as written do nothing but add to your bulk and make it take longer to retrieve it as per table 6-2. As per RAW, there isn't even a reason to use one. Nothing says I can't just ram down those 50 L Bulk shields down my trousers.
Now common sense says they should do something, like in Starfinder where they add to your bulk capacity, but we're not there yet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rameth wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Rameth wrote:
I don't see how carrying stuff is in any way a problem. Backpacks can carry 4 bulk and don't weigh you down at all. Sacks can carry 8 Bulk and are only L bulk when carried. Plus Satchels can carry 2 Bulk and also don't weigh you down at all. Carrying stuff is super easy now.
Note that none of these actually increase your carrying capacity. A backpack is simply a container that holds up to 4 bulk of items so you have somewhere to keep them; if fully loaded, it still counts 4 bulk against your limit.
Are you sure? I assumed that wearing a backpack made carrying the items easier and would therefore increase the bulk you are able to carry. It makes sense, as trying to carry 40 pounds in your hands vs putting it in a backpack are two very different experiences. Even if you weren't able to physically carry 40 pounds you'd be able to carry a backpack with said amount.

That... Is an unintuitive interpretation of the rules. Bulk limits the amount you can "carry". And I just assumed that meant "have on your person in some way". Since even if my groceries are in bags, I'm still "carrying" them. There's nothing that says that once you've put something in a container, you're no longer "carrying" it.

I will say, that according to the wording for the description of backpack:

Quote:
If you are carrying or stowing a backpack rather than wearing it on your back, it has light Bulk instead of negligible.

Which does seem like it could imply that 'carrying' and 'stowing' are two different thing and that bulk functions as you say it does. That would make the 8 Bulk Snare Kits no longer insane (they'd fit perfectly in a Sack). And would allow a significantly larger number of items carried (provided you had the storage for it all) that would actually be comparable to the number you could hold in 1e.

However, the description of bag of holding says:

Quote:
The Bulk held inside the bag doesn’t change the Bulk of the bag of holding itself.

Which seems to indirectly mean that the bulk inside of regular bags does increase the bulk of the bag itself - so even if you are no longer "carrying" the items, they still add to your bulk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm. I'm not confident enough to argue that I am correct but I do feel like sacks, backpacks, and satchels should increase your bulk in some way. Looks like I'm going to have to break the bad news to my players lol.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah I'm not a big fan. A small weapon, light armor, a hand instrument (because I'm good at perform), a healers kit (because I thought Medicine would actually be useful at some point), and a few L items... and I'm done carrying stuff. I was a Gnome so they get a STR penalty I had to work around to even do that, and with base 20 move, really can't afford to get that halved by going over the limit.

Couldn't even get a bag to help because they don't do anything, which makes no sense whatsoever. What do you think the purpose of a backpack is? It's literally to make it easier to carry more stuff.

There's a reason why Haversacks were so common before: this is really not fun. I basically can't pick anything up and I'm only carrying the basic tools needed to use a couple of skills.

Our entire group combined just didn't have any kind of good carrying capacity, and figuring out how to get the stuff at the end of dd2 back was itself work. And that wasn't a particularly large amount of stuff.

I understand what they're trying to do, but that 9 things have effectively no weight but adding an extra piece of paper suddenly cuts your speed in half? It's just wonky and I'm not sure how it's supposed to be more fun than weight was.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Gaterie wrote:
Can someone explains why bulk exists at all?

As near as I can tell, they tried to simplify a minor, optional game feature and failed. They traded grade school math for grade school math.

They could have just gotten rid of the notion of encumbrance. Many DMs already consider it to be optional even when their players use automation that adds everything up for them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Demonskunk wrote:

Every single one of my party members and I hate bulk.

Everyone in my party can hold about 1 weapon, 1 piece of armor and maybe a shield and then they're at the limit of their bulk.

Back in PF1 you could easily carry a couple of weapons, armor and some adventuring tools without hitting encumbrance if you have a 12 strength.

The carrying capacity needs to be at least doubled.

A weapon: 1 bulk

Armor: 1-2 bulk
A heavy steel shield: 1 bulk

That is hardly at 6 bulk (str 12) it just means you can't ignore strength in PF2 like you could in PF1.

You forgot

Rope (pretty important adventuring gear): 1 bulk
Ranged weapon + 10-20 ammo: 1 bulk + 1-2L or 2-3L if you go for a sling

Then, for some classes:
Alchemist tools: 2 Bulk
Repair kit: 1 bulk
Healer's kit: 1 bulk
Spellbook: 1 bulk

And again, even if you decided to go adventuring without any rope, means to attack at range, any L bulk items like rations or torches, and without one of those kits you'd only have 2-3 bulk left (depending on your armor). Which means you get to carry 2-3 B worth of loot and that's it. Your big fighter friend who also doesn't bring anything else helpful? Only 5 B worth of loot.

1 Longsword (1)

1 suit of non-heavy armor (1)
1 heavy steel shield (1)
1 50 ft Rope (1)
1 Shortbow (1)
20 arrows (2 L)
1 Repair Kit (1)

6 Bulk
2 L

You're fine at 12 Strength. Youre also kitted out like a freaking Fighter so you (should) have higher than 12 Strength.

Yes. If you're a 10 Strength Rogue then you're not kitted out like that.

How about this for a Rogue:

2 Shortswords (2 L)
1 suit of light armor (1)
1 50ft rope (1)
1 shortbow (1)
20 arrows (2 L)
Thieve's tools (1 L)

3 Bulk
5 L

You're fine at Strength 10.

Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

Silver Crusade

9 people marked this as a favorite.

The 12 STR Fighter is overencumbered. And only being able to carry the bare bones essential equipment is not a good thing. No potions or other magic items? That's bad.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).

Alternatively, you could not loot low-grade equipment you have no plans of keeping or using and proceed on to the adventure, instead of bogging yourself down with the act of taking everything you could get even a single copper for selling.

I know that probably sounds alien and strange, but it has worked for my campaigns for quite some time now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
The 12 STR Fighter is overencumbered. And only being able to carry the bare bones essential equipment is not a good thing. No potions or other magic items? That's bad.

No. You're not overencumbered until 10L

6.2 is not higher than 6.0 in PF2


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).

Yeah... You don't take it all.

Grab their coins, as 1000 coins is when it has a bulk... Then take the short swords (they are 1 L each I believe) leave the rest.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).

Alternatively, you could not loot low-grade equipment you have no plans of keeping or using and proceed on to the adventure, instead of bogging yourself down with the act of taking everything you could get even a single copper for selling.

I know that probably sounds alien and strange, but it has worked for my campaigns for quite some time now.

Not taking everything to sell? That is very alien and strange. You claim hoarding is unnecessary? Unheard of!

In all seriousness, that is a very different way of playing and would need to be agreed upon by the GM and the players to work - players agree not to try to sell everything that isn't nailed down, GM agrees not to include that sort of behavior when determining gold rewards.

I accept that way of playing is less headache and probably more realistic... But it has been quite fun to come back to town with a dozen shortbows, 8 sets of armor, and 10 longswords to sell. And I am saddened that the hoarder playstyle is no longer feasible until higher levels (when hoarding is less relevant to the amount of gold made).

Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

War for the Crown actually gave a bunch of artisan's tools and then some bulky art objects pretty early on. It was really interesting how the PCs juggled the value vs bulk ratio, leaving certain items behind and going back for them later when they achieved additional hands to carry things (and later met a merchant where they could pawn off the unneeded artisan's tools and just keep the good ones for their dwarf fighter crafter). It all went much faster than I expected (I figured my group has a lot of physics doctorates and math and CS degrees among the players so they wouldn't speed up from weight to bulk as much as some groups might, but I was wrong).

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

While I do not fully hate the bulk system, I can see where it could make things a bit easier book keeping wise.
Me personally do like the weight system over the bulk system. Not that any table I have ever played at ever enforced any weight restrictions on what you carried. I still kept track of all the gear weight to keep me honest if i was ever questioned about it.

I would like to have an option of doing either way, more options are better in my experience.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

bulk is great. so much easier to calculate than weight. our party enforced it, because it's so much easier to do now. to know when you are over or under. and it made for some meaningful decisions. my cleric, with 12 strength wearing heavy armor, had to made some tough decisions regarding bulk. it definitely made the game better, and I was really looking forward to that ability boost.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zorae wrote:
...I am saddened that the hoarder playstyle is no longer feasible until higher levels (when hoarding is less relevant to the amount of gold made).

The hoarder play-style is plenty feasible before higher levels.

All that has functionally changed is that instead of hoarding being enabled by no other means than how much the stronger party members can carry on their persons, it is now enabled by way of purchasing pack animals (which are only 20 of a character's starting 150 silver pieces, so plenty affordable).


You could also just buy 2 pack mules for only 60 sp. They can each carry 8 or 9 bulk, depending on which one you choose. Just haul them around with you at low levels.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rameth wrote:
You could also just buy 2 pack mules for only 60 sp. They can each carry 8 or 9 bulk, depending on which one you choose. Just haul them around with you at low levels.

Sure thing... If you don't mind being down to 1 action/round [handle/command animal] and that means it's 100% impossible to ride a mount AND have a pack animal unless you take the ride feat and use every action you have. And that's with ONE pack mule. You need 5 actions in a round to ride a mount with the ride feat and bring along 2 pack mules.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Rameth wrote:
You could also just buy 2 pack mules for only 60 sp. They can each carry 8 or 9 bulk, depending on which one you choose. Just haul them around with you at low levels.
Sure thing... If you don't mind being down to 1 action/round [handle/command animal] and that means it's 100% impossible to ride a mount AND have a pack animal unless you take the ride feat and use every action you have. And that's with ONE pack mule. You need 5 actions in a round to ride a mount with the ride feat and bring along 2 pack mules.

Why are you trying to apply the combat rules to non-combat situations?

You don't make people roll attack rolls to stick their fork in a sausage they intend to eat, do you?

Or to phrase that all differently: What you've said is only true if you are in a battle, and why shouldn't it be a real pain to manage (likely terrified and self-motivated) animals in the middle of battle?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well I would argue that pulling a pack animal along with you on a rope isn't the same as telling how to specifically move. It's domesticated. It just goes. Also couldn't you just use your Horses as pack animals? 4 players, 4 pairs of saddle bags strapped to them. Seems just as fine. As far as I can tell you can do that and still ride them around. No rule says otherwise. Renting a warhorse is only 10 sp day. Not that bad of a deal.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, why buy hemp rope when you can buy silk? In all the above examples, that’s 1L vs. 1 bulk.

Silver Crusade

HWalsh wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The 12 STR Fighter is overencumbered. And only being able to carry the bare bones essential equipment is not a good thing. No potions or other magic items? That's bad.

No. You're not overencumbered until 10L

6.2 is not higher than 6.0 in PF2

Does it actually say that in the rules?

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).

Yeah... You don't take it all.

Grab their coins, as 1000 coins is when it has a bulk... Then take the short swords (they are 1 L each I believe) leave the rest.

And if they don't have coins? You're assuming all loot will be neat piles of gold to pick up, when loot is whatever the GM puts out. As Mark pointed out it could be burdensome pieces of art, it could be equipment, magical or mundane.


Rysky wrote:
Does it actually say that in the rules?

It does.

CRB p. 175 Bulk Values wrote:


Ten light items count as 1 Bulk, and you don’t
count fractions (so 9 light items count as 0, and 11 items
count as 1).


7 people marked this as a favorite.

This is a very complicated way of writing "your max Bulk is 5.9 + Str bonus". I still fail to see how it is simpler than old encumbrance.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).

Yeah... You don't take it all.

Grab their coins, as 1000 coins is when it has a bulk... Then take the short swords (they are 1 L each I believe) leave the rest.

And if they don't have coins? You're assuming all loot will be neat piles of gold to pick up, when loot is whatever the GM puts out. As Mark pointed out it could be burdensome pieces of art, it could be equipment, magical or mundane.

Then you hope someone has a strong back.

The moral of the story:
Don't. Dump. Strength.

There are consequences for a person of average strength who goes adventuring. Just as there are consequences for a person of average dex.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

The moral of the story:

Don't. Dump. Strength.

The moral of the story:

Don't. Use. Bulk.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.
DerNils wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Does it actually say that in the rules?

It does.

CRB p. 175 Bulk Values wrote:


Ten light items count as 1 Bulk, and you don’t
count fractions (so 9 light items count as 0, and 11 items
count as 1).

-_-

That is nonsensical to the point that I have many expletives I could use to convey it as such.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Rysky wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Zorae wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Stop the hyperbole. If you're running into bulk problems get a bag of holding or bump your strength a little.

You fight 3 bandits on the way to the dungeon. They each have a short sword, hide armor, and 2 javelins. That's 15 B of loot.

You now have to turn around and go back to town to go sell your loot because everyone is now at their max load, overencumbered, or can only carry 2 more things before becoming so.

Unless you have a packmule (possibly multiple), someone who doesn't mind losing 10 feet of movement (and a decent str), a dwarf who doesn't mind losing 5 feet of movement (so not wearing medium or heavy armor), or a bunch of str based monks, there is no reasonable way to store loot before getting access to bags of holding. Which is unobtainable until level 3-4 (probably not 3 as weapons and armor will be the priority).

Yeah... You don't take it all.

Grab their coins, as 1000 coins is when it has a bulk... Then take the short swords (they are 1 L each I believe) leave the rest.

And if they don't have coins? You're assuming all loot will be neat piles of gold to pick up, when loot is whatever the GM puts out. As Mark pointed out it could be burdensome pieces of art, it could be equipment, magical or mundane.

Then you hope someone has a strong back.

The moral of the story:
Don't. Dump. Strength.

There are consequences for a person of average strength who goes adventuring. Just as there are consequences for a person of average dex.

I have an 18 Strength so i can carry 9.99999999999 Bulk.

That is not a gamechanger.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:


The moral of the story:
Don't. Dump. Strength.

Don't. Play. A. Gnome.

That's what I got out of this.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Gaterie wrote:

This is a very complicated way of writing "your max Bulk is 5.9 + Str bonus". I still fail to see how it is simpler than old encumbrance.

Because it's not. In the old system, everything has a weight. You add up the weight, round for things that have partial weight (ie: 5 arrows), compare to the table, and done.

Now, you add up the things with a bulk, add up the L items, add up the items that in some quantity add up to an L, take the floor of divide by the number of those items tho get an L and add them to your L, take the floor of divide by 10 of the total L and add to your bulk, then compare.

It's not actually simpler. It's the illusion of simplicity by having smaller numbers.


Tridus wrote:
It's not actually simpler. It's the illusion of simplicity by having smaller numbers.

And yet, however weird it might be, in practice at the table it seems a whole heck of a lot simpler.

Especially when it comes to appropriately modeling an item that hasn't had a weight assigned to it, like say a bronze bust that a player elected to steal in hopes of selling that the adventure writer might have assigned a value to but hasn't attached a weight. I can just say "2 bulk" and that feels right, but if I were to guess at an actual weight I don't even know where to start - other than to Google search relevant details (and probably end up doing math of my own as a result, just so that I can give a "feels right" answer to a player for them to do more math with).

1 to 50 of 206 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Playtest Feedback / Doomsday Dawn Game Master Feedback / Bulk is bad. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.