| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm confused, as the book says items weighing 1 bulk are about 5-10 pounds, but says a medium creature (like a human) is about 6 bulks, or 30-60 pounds. Unless they mean a toddler (which seems unlikely), that's a "little" too light.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
A bulk is not actually a unit of weight. There is no consistent bulk to lbs equation and using a 5-10lbs approximation is very rough and subject to wild variation. Trying to define one doesn't work.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Essentially, Bulk represents both weight and ease of transport. That's why backpacks reduce the total bulk of the goods within them, and something that's long and gangly might have a higher bulk than an item that'd likely be heavier in real life. That makes for no direct weight -> bulk conversion - just go for what feels right based on the existing bulks, IMO. I think the only reason medium humanoids are 6 bulk is to make it possible to drag your friend out of danger - it's wildly out of line with the rest of the established bulks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Essentially, Bulk represents both weight and ease of transport. That's why backpacks reduce the total bulk of the goods within them, and something that's long and gangly might have a higher bulk than an item that'd likely be heavier in real life. That makes for no direct weight -> bulk conversion - just go for what feels right based on the existing bulks, IMO. I think the only reason medium humanoids are 6 bulk is to make it possible to drag your friend out of danger - it's wildly out of line with the rest of the established bulks.
t just means creatures are super easy to carry, like they all have built in carrying handles. ;)
Not to mention, the book isn't consistent with creature bulk, either. A medium creature is 12 bulk rather than 6 bulk when petrified, for example.
It's not inherently inconsistent as you're comparing a creature with an object: something petrified is no longer a creature. It seems totally reasonable that a human sized statue would be more bulk than a human.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Repeat after me "Bulk is an abstraction, not a simulation. Bulk is for making life easy at the table for the most common uses"
People kept ignoring weight attables so this was their solution, an abstract compromise most people would find easy to manage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe this will help:
1. How much bulk is this grain of sand? Negligible.
2. How much bulk is this piece of candy? Negligible.
3. How much bulk is this glass vial? Light.
4. How much bulk is this ingot? 1 bulk.
5. How much bulk is this barrel? Eh... 3 bulk.
6. How much bulk is this ladder? Eh... 3 bulk.
7. How much bulk is this person? Eh... 6 bulk.
8. How much bulk is this grand piano? Whew... like 16? I dunno, let's go with that.
9. How much bulk is this wagon? Uh, it's really big and heavy. Let's say 20 bulk.
10. How much bulk is this house sized boulder? Idk, what's the maximum bulk you can lift? Three times that.
11. How much bulk is this castle? Can't be counted as a single object, so I can't give it a bulk number. If you have some mechanic on your character that could potentially lift a castle, let's hash it out, but for now it's NaN.
This is the context in how bulk is used. It's not for players to venture out on their own and figure out just how much nonsense they can lift without a GM to consult.
So 1 bulk = "Whatever arbitrary weight, wieldiness, and compactness combination that you and the GM can agree on to continue the story"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, best not to think too hard about all of this.
I'm still amused by the carrying capacity of Starfinder ships. Those poor, poor, kilometer long "bulk freighters" that apparently couldn't fill up a big box store...
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
3. How much bulk is this glass vial? Light.
A flask of oil is Negligible so I can't see the glass container without the oil being more bulk.
6. How much bulk is this ladder? Eh... 3 bulk.
8. How much bulk is this grand piano? Whew... like 16? I dunno, let's go with that.
These already have a weight so you really don't have to debate these.
This is the context in how bulk is used. It's not for players to venture out on their own and figure out just how much nonsense they can lift without a GM to consult.
So 1 bulk = "Whatever arbitrary weight, wieldiness, and compactness combination that you and the GM can agree on to continue the story"
Yep, which can be annoying, for both the player and the DM , to have to do on the fly. This is doubly true when the given examples often turn out nonsensical.
People kept ignoring weight attables so this was their solution, an abstract compromise most people would find easy to manage.
If you ignored weight, why are you NOW counting bulk? And I don't know who these "people" are: I always did it and it wasn't what I'd call hard.. IMO, it's not any harder than bulk to do simple math: I'd argue that once you bring in different sized items and creatures, Bulk is more complicated than PF1 weight.
For instance, a Large creature treats 10 items of 1 Bulk as 1 Bulk and a bag of 999 coins has NO bulk [not negligible, light or bulk] so I can stack as many of those bags on a horse as I want. Now if I fill them to 1000, they now weigh a bulk but I have to count them as Light but then if I take them off One weighs nothing while the other is a bulk again... Now on the flip side, your familiar has NO problem carrying the EXACT SAME number of 999 coin bags [they have NO bulk] but if they try to pick up a nail, it's unknown if they can as they have no str stat and therefor have no carry number and the coin would be negligible bulk [more than the 999 coins]... Yep, sure easier than simple addition and multiplication. :P
People kept ignoring weight attables so this was their solution, an abstract compromise most people would find easy to manage.If you ignored weight, why are you NOW counting bulk? And I don't know who these "people" are: I always did it and it wasn't what I'd call hard.. IMO, it's not any harder than bulk to do simple math: I'd argue that once you bring in different sized items and creatures, Bulk is more complicated than PF1 weight.
Not to take away from your overall point, but keep in mind that simple math for you is not simple math for the rest of us, judging from our discussions about the Percussive trait the other day.
In the case of the nail and coins, having a binary state of "doesn't count for bulk" and "does count for bulk" really is simpler, even if it makes no sense when you think about it.
Edit: I'm actually somewhat amused that the same problems you have with bulk are what most of us have with big lists of specific weights, that of having to break the formulas up into a multistep process. It just doesn't feel like a multiple step process for you because you can do at a glance what takes the rest of us a calculator and probably a spreadsheet.
Honestly this explains a LOT of the problems you've had with bulk and why your complaints perhaps felt like they were falling on deaf ears. Bulk is genuinely harder for you at the same time it is easier and less complex for most.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main reason that creatures are relatively underrated for bulk is fairly simple -- PCs are encouraged to pick up unconscious allies and carry them out of danger, so the rules make it easier to do so.
How did that old song go? "He ain't heavy, he's my brother"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bulk is an abstraction. It's specifically to point to the fact that it's easier to carry 10 red bricks than 100 pool noodles, despite those two things having about the same weight.
A system for "you can only carry so much stuff" that has some rough, weird, blobby corners is better than a system for "you can only carry so much stuff" that just gets ignored.
As a GM I read "what is the bulk of this item" is a question of "how hard is this to carry". So I can just throw out a number feels right without having to crack a book or google "how much does a 12 foot dining table weigh?" neither of which is worth slowing the game down for.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM I get into trouble with new players all the time when it comes to bulk.
PC1: I pick up and carry Teddy away from the monster that downed him.
GM: Alright. Teddy counts as 6 bulk. If that doesn't exceed your maximum encumbrance then you're good to go. Be mindful that it might still slow you down though. It's one action to move up to him, another to pick him up, and a third to move away--albeit while encumbered. You will need both hands.
PC1: Only 6 bulk? What about all his gear?
GM: Is he wearing full plate, strapped to a ladder, impaled by a longspear, or anything else extremely heavy or awkward?
PC1: Um...No?
GM: Then we're counting it as 6 bulk. Under unusual circumstances, I might have said more, but clothing and a bit of extra gear doesn't make him appreciably more difficult to carry than if he were naked.
PC2: Cool! In that case, I'm going to rescue Princess Reginald then. Since he spat on us earlier though, I'm going to drag him through the mud as I get him to safety.
GM: Alright. Since you're only dragging, Princess Reginald only counts as 3 bulk. However, you will need to add the bulk of all his gear to that. You'll also need both hands free to drag, and will only be able to drag him very slowly.
PC2: Why are we counting Princess Reginald's baggage, but not Teddy's gear?
GM: Because the rules for dragging say we must.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: I'm actually somewhat amused that the same problems you have with bulk are what most of us have with big lists of specific weights, that of having to break the formulas up into a multistep process. It just doesn't feel like a multiple step process for you because you can do at a glance what takes the rest of us a calculator and probably a spreadsheet.
Honestly this explains a LOT of the problems you've had with bulk and why your complaints perhaps felt like they were falling on deaf ears. Bulk is genuinely harder for you at the same time it is easier and less complex for most.
For me it's not having formulas but that items have variable totals depending on who has them. With weight, you have a larger/smaller creature, it's a simple percentage once and then the total stays the same after that. Same with items made for different sized items: total them up and multiply for a static total.
Bulk shifts depending on who picks it up so it's not static but in flux, which is... disconcerting.
Additionally, bulk totals just seem randomly made: there's been a lot made of the fact that how easy/hard it is to carry items is a factor, but it's application has been nonsensical to say the least. With the 'just throw out what seem reasonable' method of unlisted items, you see HUGE variability between games/DM's: with weight, I can google whatever object and come up with a weight quickly. Bulk is just up to a dartboard throw...
calculator: this is the reason I never understood people having issues with weight: these days, it's hard to find someone that doesn't have access to the internet, a phone, tablet, laptop, ect that can easily do arithmetic. Even without a calculator app/program any search engine will bring one up online. So I never got 'it's hard' comments. Now it might be tedious but that might be the case for anything you calculate/keep track of. I know people that are literally incapable of figuring out change without the register but can work out the weigh of equipment with their Ipad and I think they'd still need the Ipad to work out bulk...
Bulk is an abstraction. It's specifically to point to the fact that it's easier to carry 10 red bricks than 100 pool noodles, despite those two things having about the same weight.
A system for "you can only carry so much stuff" that has some rough, weird, blobby corners is better than a system for "you can only carry so much stuff" that just gets ignored.
It doesn't really follow that though: you have bigger, unwieldier and heavier items the same bulk as compact and lighter items. As a concept, how easy it is to carry sounds good: it sounds worse when it's seeming used at random with no rhyme or reason.
I'll also note that the 3.X way of doing it, with weight on items and... cubic feet in containers... Yeah. It made sense, but no items had their actual size defined. Bulk abstract both and make it only one value, so easier to have all the data needed.
Not really: bulk ignores size considerations. I think one reason they dropped most containers is that by the rules, you could fit multiple javelins inn them. And as it is, a Lage polearm from an ogre fits completely into a backpack so you can get a -2 bulk reduction on it... I'm not sure Bulk solved anything about containers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...these days, it's hard to find someone that doesn't have access to the internet, a phone, tablet, laptop, ect that can easily do arithmetic. Even without a calculator app/program any search engine will bring one up online. So I never got 'it's hard' comments.
You've clearly never GM'd in poor neighborhoods. I've known quite a few destitute or near-destitute families that didn't have any of those things. (And when they were lucky enough to get something like that, it was often a dumpster-dive item, garage sale find, or hand me down that didn't last long.)
I've also met a half dozen or so kids who were dumped off at the game shop on the daily because the table fees to let them roleplay all day were cheaper than daycare. They often didn't have any of those items either.
I've spent SO much money on pizza and other food items over the years simply because some of my players wouldn't have been able to eat otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...these days, it's hard to find someone that doesn't have access to the internet, a phone, tablet, laptop, ect that can easily do arithmetic. Even without a calculator app/program any search engine will bring one up online. So I never got 'it's hard' comments.You've clearly never GM'd in poor neighborhoods. I've known quite a few destitute or near-destitute families that didn't have any of those things. (And when they were lucky enough to get something like that, it was often a dumpster-dive item or hand me down that didn't last long.)
LOL You're talking to the WRONG person here: it wasn't that long ago I had dial-up internet. I'm from a rural area where it's not uncommon for people to live paycheck to paycheck... Someone so destitute they can't afford a $1 solar calculator is going to have a hard time buying gaming supplies and if they are using someone else's materials, wouldn't those include something that can use to calculate? There isn't a library/school computer to use? And I'll be honest, even the poorest people I know have some kind of smartphone these days: I can't say I understand but they seem willing to ride the bus and eat ramen if they can have their phone. Heck, I know someone was living in their car that stopped at the McDonalds near me to use their internet in their phone.
I've spent SO much money on pizza and other food items over the years simply because some of my players wouldn't have been able to eat otherwise.
It's a dollar a calculator. That's collecting 20 aluminum cans and recycling them. So if they collect the thrown out cans from that game shop, they can make that in a few hours. You're barking up the wrong tree if you're thinking I'm from an affluent city location.
For me it's not having formulas but that items have variable totals depending on who has them. With weight, you have a larger/smaller creature, it's a simple percentage once and then the total stays the same after that. Same with items made for different sized items: total them up and multiply for a static total.
I can't be any clearer about this: simple percentages are hard for most people. They just are.
And I'm saying this as someone that calculates carrying capacity at a professional level, with others that do so, on an ongoing and frequent basis. What makes sense and is simple to you is not objectively easy to conceptualize and solve. Edit: And yes, that is with a calculator. People have problems figuring out what to plug into the calculator to solve the formula. This is why we have algebra and calculus, specifically to tell us how to break these things down.
Edit2: this is also why the standard of my industry is TEU, not weight. Weight gives people headaches; TEUs are pretty simple to imagine.
Having size turn off if an item counts as bulk or doesn't is also pretty simple in comparison to getting the actual weight. You just...don't count it. Doesn't get any simpler than that. I won't argue that it makes sense, but that isn't something I require of an abstraction, just that it be simple.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What's the difference between the simple addition and subtraction that goes into tracking hit point totals (something that occurs often and regularly in an encounter) and the same addition and subtraction behind tracking weight (which is much less dynamic)? Why didn't the game go to damage expressed as "2 wounds, 1 wound, 1 light wound (10 of which become a wound, but with absolutely no gradiation between a light wound and wound (i.e., swords can deal 1 wound, 2 wounds, 3 wounds and so on, but a dagger can either deal a light wound or a wound, no in-between)), and negligible wounds"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't be any clearer about this: simple percentages are hard for most people. They just are.
I 100% understand different calculation capabilities without a device. I can't see having a total and dividing by 2 on a calculator [or the equivalent] as hard. It's literally getting a total, hitting the divide symbol and hitting 2... It's literally grade school math: we aren't talking weird percentages, we're talking about x2 or 1/2. 'you have 4 apples and eat half, how many do you have?' isn't hard. I've had to go over this with online learning because of the pandemic: I hope that the average gamer can do what grade schooler are required to do. :P
Edit2: this is also why the standard of my industry is TEU, not weight. Weight gives people headaches; TEUs are pretty simple to imagine.
I'm not sure why weight is a factor: it's addition, subtraction, multiplication and division no matter what the unit it. TEU makes sense in a situation where you measure volume: weight isn't factored in though: you have to multiply the TEU by default cargo values for their weight. Even using industry defaults, the weight might be anywhere from 2-12 tonnes. So all TEU does is claculate the shape and size of the item and not the weight.
What's the difference between the simple addition and subtraction that goes into tracking hit point totals (something that occurs often and regularly in an encounter) and the same addition and subtraction behind tracking weight (which is much less dynamic)? Why didn't the game go to damage expressed as "2 wounds, 1 wound, 1 light wound (10 of which become a wound, but with absolutely no gradiation between a light wound and wound (i.e., swords can deal 1 wound, 2 wounds, 3 wounds and so on, but a dagger can either deal a light wound or a wound, no in-between)), and negligible wounds"?
I'm not sure. We have to add and subtract hp. We have to double damage on crits and 1/2 levels in seceral places... At least I'm not the only one that doesn't get it.
Edit2: this is also why the standard of my industry is TEU, not weight. Weight gives people headaches; TEUs are pretty simple to imagine.I'm not sure why weight is a factor: it's addition, subtraction, multiplication and division no matter what the unit it. TEU makes sense in a situation where you measure volume: weight isn't factored in though: you have to multiply the TEU by default cargo values for their weight. Even using industry defaults, the weight might be anywhere from 2-12 tonnes. So all TEU does is claculate the shape and size of the item and not the weight.
Actually its used for carrying capacity, much like bulk is, for much the same logic and results. Your understanding of how it works makes sense from the outside, but is both simplistic and wrong.
I could go into why, but you don't believe me and you're starting to throw out insults, so why bother?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some people have mental blocks, and for them it isn't even about it being the math. I have a player who is an accountant for a living and has a degree in business, majoring in logistics. He HATES the old encumbrance system and loves the new bulk system.
As for what you have personally done in the past (talking to graystone), it isn't really relevant? Paizo has better statistics on this than either of us. In my time running store games (5e) I witnessed LOTS of tables ignoring weight or having players ask to ignore weight.
I don't mind calculating weight, but bulk is quicker to do the math if only fractionally so. Given that you are only dealing in 1's, 2s and multiples of 10. Especially when nearly everything you deal with frequently will be negligible, light or 1 bulk.
But as an experiment:
PF2e fighter with pack gear
Hide Armour: 2
Longsword: 1
Steel Shield: 1
Backpack:
Bedroll: L
Chalk:
Flint/Steel:
Grappling.H: L
Rations(2w): Lx2
Rope: L
Soap:
Torch(5): Lx5
Waterskin: L
A total of 5 bulk 1 light (4 bulk if 2+ light items are in the backpack)
PF1e fighter with the same loadout
Hide Armour: 25 lbs
Longsword: 4 lbs
Steel Shield: 15 lbs
Backpack: 2 lbs
Bedroll: 5 lbs
Beltpouch: 0.5 lbs
Chalk:
Flint/Steel:
Grappling.H: 4 lbs
Rations(14d): 14 lbs
Rope: 10 lbs
Soap: 0.5 lbs
Torch(5): 5 lbs
Waterskin: 4 lbs
A total of 89 lbs
This is the best/least complicated it will be for a PF1e character's inventory. It will only get longer / more arduous as the game progresses.
Quite doable, but it should be clear why bulk is easier.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't see having a total and dividing by 2 on a calculator [or the equivalent] as hard.
The issue is not whether you can see why it is hard. For you, it's not.
But for other people it IS hard. Please stop being derogatory about their education, math skills and other personal characteristics.
Your argument is basically, "I have superior skills to these people, therefor they shouldn't be having problems."
Please stop
What's the difference between the simple addition and subtraction that goes into tracking hit point totals (something that occurs often and regularly in an encounter) and the same addition and subtraction behind tracking weight (which is much less dynamic)? Why didn't the game go to damage expressed as "2 wounds, 1 wound, 1 light wound (10 of which become a wound, but with absolutely no gradiation between a light wound and wound (i.e., swords can deal 1 wound, 2 wounds, 3 wounds and so on, but a dagger can either deal a light wound or a wound, no in-between)), and negligible wounds"?
A couple of reasons:
Mostly because people like rolling dice. If weapons did a static amount of damage instead of variable, they may well have done as you suggest. I've seen other systems that do so, like WoD.
Weight has the complicating factor of the imperial system screwing things up from being even fractions. Metric would be much easier to calculate, so we may have not transferred if that hadn't been a factor. (except Oz are easier to deal with than grams, strangely enough, for the next reason).
Finally, the size of the numbers is part of it. Once one of the things you're adding or subtracting is 3 digits, then people start to go cross-eyed. The size of the thing you're adding and subtracting onto is less of a factor. Multiplication or division of any amount immediately makes people less willing to do the math, even when the factor or divisor is 2.
If there was an ability that said "you lose half your current HP from this strike" I guarantee people would hate it. It is a super simple calculation, but it is too much for most people to enjoy.
Edit: also, this is probably why the game calculates the battlefield in squares instead of straightforward feet, for the most part. Those aren't complex fractions or equations either, but squares are even simpler and easier to divide and multiply. Though it sort of does both and is kind of a muddled mess; its not hard to see how it would be easier if they went fully to one or the other.
Edit2: I should add that seeing what people use in what context is an interesting and frequent exercise. Regulations are written in pounds, common usage is typically tonnage, and carrying capacity is measured in volume (TEU is a unit of volume, though fun fact, not all 20' units are 1 TEU in size). So payloads usually have to have all 3 measured to meet each context, but we do our work in either TEUs or Tons, depending on the exact task.
My KPIs have always been in TEUs, for example. And I've often had to point out that it is literally illegal for me to do what someone is asking of me, because they're measuring in TEUs but not tons or pounds.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually its used for carrying capacity, much like bulk is, for much the same logic and results. Your understanding of how it works makes sense from the outside, but is both simplistic and wrong.
I understand it's used for carry capacity and is an inexact unit as it's not a measure of mass meaning you have to draw conclusions about the maximum mass. It also has clear default totals for default empty weight and a net load weights. Now it's possible I've misunderstood something: it's not something I use on a regular basis.
I could go into why, but you don't believe me and you're starting to throw out insults, so why bother?
Insulting?... The only thing I can see that might seem so is my talk about grade school math and it was an actual example. I'm LITERALLY teaching about division and multiplication. It's LITERALLY something 4th graders are expected to know. I LITERALLY can watch 4th graders do simple division and percentages. i don't see it as insulting but illustrating my point: we aren't talking rocket surgery but doing the kind of math you have to do in combat in the same system.
I can't see having a total and dividing by 2 on a calculator [or the equivalent] as hard.The issue is not whether you can see why it is hard. For you, it's not.
But for other people it IS hard. Please stop being derogatory about their education, math skills and other personal characteristics.
Your argument is basically, "I have superior skills to these people, therefor they shouldn't be having problems."
Please stop
I'm took myself out of the equation. I'm talking about REAL gamers I know and REAL 4th graders. So don't frame it as I'm taking myself as the base line: I'm not. I can tell you my nephew, my friends kid and the girl that can't give out change without the register and been quite capable of "having a total and dividing by 2 on a calculator": I've seen them do basic math with a calculator including simple percentages. I wouldn't categorize any of them superior: they seem pretty average to me.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not to mention, the book isn't consistent with creature bulk, either. A medium creature is 12 bulk rather than 6 bulk when petrified, for example.Most kinds of stone are denser than flesh - it's totally reasonable that a petrified creature weighs more.
Heh, now I'm remembering all the use I got out of that old 'How Heavy is my Giant' article from Dragon. I found it great when playing superhero games where a person could be made of ice, or stone, or metal, or wood, and I wanted to know about how heavy a person-sized bit of that substance was. :)
As to the original question; 'How much is a bulk, really?'
About half a stone, or 738.4 drams.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another argument for bulk is that determining what your carrying capacity is is much easier as well.
P2: how much can I carry? 5+str mod bulk. 10 L is one bulk. The first bulk in your backpack (and the pack itself) doesn't count.
P1: how much can I carry? Here look at this full page long table and find your number according to your size. If you have a backpack, you're counted as having a different number so you have to look it up again. Also these numbers are not written taking into account how much an adventurer has to carry, so you might be to encumbered to carry both your armor and food.
It also takes into account that a ladder and a shield might be the same weight, but one is a lot harder to carry around all day long.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm took myself out of the equation. I'm talking about REAL gamers I know and REAL 4th graders. So don't frame it as I'm taking myself as the base line: I'm not. I can tell you my nephew, my friends kid and the girl that can't give out change without the register and been quite capable of "having a total and dividing by 2 on a calculator":I've seen them do basic math with a calculator including simple percentages. I wouldn't categorize any of them superior: they seem pretty average to me.
It's lovely that everyone you know doesn't have a problem with it.
That does not mean that no one else does. Denigrating people who DO have a problem is still not acceptable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It does feel like for the overwhelming majority of the audience for a game like this, people are just going to ignore the rules for "how much you can carry" if they are too cumbersome.
There certainly are people who will want a hugely granular complex system for limiting "how much you can carry" but catering to those folks runs precisely contrary to "catering to everybody else."
It's the same reason Pathfinder doesn't have "tables to roll for what part of the body you hit with your sword."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another argument for bulk is that determining what your carrying capacity is is much easier as well.
P2: how much can I carry? 5+str mod bulk. 10 L is one bulk. The first bulk in your backpack (and the pack itself) doesn't count.
P1: how much can I carry? Here look at this full page long table and find your number according to your size.
It doesn't have to be a binary thing: you can pick option C and just say carry is Str score x10 with the backpack adding to your str score for carry. Keeping weight doesn't mean everything would have to be a it was in PF1.
It also takes into account that a ladder and a shield might be the same weight, but one is a lot harder to carry around all day long.
For every place it makes sense, you have one where it doesn't: a 10' pole is the same bulk for an 8' tall medium creature as it is for a 2'6" gnome, and 1' long flute is the same as that 10' pole... ;)
It's lovely that everyone you know doesn't have a problem with it.
That does not mean that no one else does. Denigrating people who DO have a problem is still not acceptable.
I've tutored quite a few people over the years so I think I have a fairly good grasp of 'average' ability. Even my worst students have been able to do simple math with a calculator and some of them where quite bad at math in general. And I'm not saying some people don't have issues but I think that anyone that does would be having the same issue with PF2 in general as you have to do THE EXACT SAME MATH in the system. You have to divine and multiple. You have to add or subtract. Again, we're not talking about anything particularly difficult in context of what the system requires of you in other places.
As to Denigrating people... I sure don't see it. If the game can expect a player to double damage and bulk or halve time with Armor Assist or level multiclassing then I completely do not see how expecting people to do the EXACT SAME THING is so denigrating when it's someplace else.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dont see much difference in between weight and bulk when it comes to the math involved apart from the fact that you will probably use smaller numbers when using bulk and fractions that have been substituted by L. HOWEVER the same people that would benefit from smaller numbers apparently do not have any problems managing triple digit hit points.
On the downside bulk often seems very deliberate and not very intuitive at least not for me.
And people who dont like carrying rules will probably ignore both.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dont see much difference in between weight and bulk when it comes to the math involved apart from the fact that you will probably use smaller numbers when using weight and fractions that have been substituted by L. HOWEVER the same people that would benefit from smaller numbers apparently do not have any problems managing triple digit hit points.
On the downside bulk often seems very deliberate and not very intuitive at least not for me.
And people who dont like carrying rules will probably ignore both.
Triple digit hit points is what you're adding or subtracting from, not what you're adding or subtracting, is the difference.
Should subtracting 25 tons from 5515 be more complex than subtracting 49980 from 11030000 pounds? It is the same math in both systems. How about 2 units from a total of 123? Or 2 cars from 80, as opposed to 165 feet from 7600 feet? These aren't random examples by the way, but a near daily task for my team. Actually more like hourly task when we're on night shift, but anyways.
And then there's horsepower per ton. Whoever came up with THAT standard can go walk into the sea, but it is extremely intuitive as a standard, if annoying to calculate.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
HOWEVER the same people that would benefit from smaller numbers apparently do not have any problems managing triple digit hit points.
It's harder to do weight once than it is to subtract the same numbers from your hp over the course of every adventure?
-5 hp, -6 hp, - 9 hp, - 2 hp from 120hp good.
-5 lbs, -6 lbs, - 9 lbs, - 2 lbs from 120lbs carry bad.
Triple digit hit points is what you're adding or subtracting from, not what you're adding or subtracting, is the difference.
Why aren't you subtracting weight from your triple digit carry capacity? You could literally be using the exact same numbers from the same total.
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.
Believe it or not I would have asked the same question but he was faster. Where is the difference subtracting the hit for 29 damage from your 121 HP or taking your 10lb rope out of your 89lb backpack?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Try carrying a young kid in the following situations :
- kid wants to be carried
- kid sleeps
- kid refuses to be carriedI swear the kid's weight easily triples between the first and the last. And I am not even talking about their bulk here.
In the third case, you are technically in combat with the kid and have to "win" the fight to carry him or her anywhere. At the very least, you are slowed down by the actions you have to take to maintain the grapple.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.
I've listened. I've taken what I've heard from you and balanced it against a lot of people I've specifically taught math to: there is a disconnect between the 2. I believe you think you're right, which is why I'm questioning things. For example you're essentially saying:
-5 hp, -6 hp, - 9 hp, - 2 hp from 120hp good.
-5 lbs, -6 lbs, - 9 lbs, - 2 lbs from 120lbs carry bad.
I just can't get that logic to work in my head. It's not a failure to listen or examine but a failure to understand where you are coming from: I can't understand how using the exact same math the game wants you to do is fine in one place that you use all the time in combat but is unacceptable in another place you only do when you add/subtract equipment...
If you don't wish to continue, fine. I'll assume you made a good faith even if you aren't willing to give me that much. Later.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.Believe it or not I would have asked the same question but he was faster. Where is the difference subtracting the hit for 29 damage from your 121 HP or taking your 10lb rope out of your 89lb backpack?
Because I need to recalculate if my encumbrance status changes ?
HP is simple. Encumbrance less so. Bulk simplifies encumbrance.
So, believe it or not, I appreciate having the bulk system in place to avoid adding/removing weights.
It is not even a matter of math ability, just that I found the Encumbrance by weight system tedious and the bulk system is less so AFAIC.
Just because you do not see the need does not mean the need is not there.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Try carrying a young kid in the following situations :
- kid wants to be carried
- kid sleeps
- kid refuses to be carriedI swear the kid's weight easily triples between the first and the last. And I am not even talking about their bulk here.
In the third case, you are technically in combat with the kid and have to "win" the fight to carry him or her anywhere. At the very least, you are slowed down by the actions you have to take to maintain the grapple.
Not necessarily. My kid does not try to escape my grasp. He just makes zero effort to help me carry him. And it really feels like he weights thrice as much as he does when he helps me carry him through his balance and holds.
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.Believe it or not I would have asked the same question but he was faster. Where is the difference subtracting the hit for 29 damage from your 121 HP or taking your 10lb rope out of your 89lb backpack?
That, nothing. Like I said, the problems of additional and subtraction don't start arriving until you start adding and subtracting triple digits, like when you're dragging something or figuring out how much capacity your new strength score gives you, and how that alters other statistics.
1 bulk from 5 is still easier than 10 from 89 though, even if both are well within people's capabiltiies.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because I need to recalculate if my encumbrance status changes ?
Any change you make affects bulk and weight similarly.
HP is simple.
Is it? How is a staus change modifying encumbrance hard but temp hp easy? Or resistance? Or weakness? or... There are FAR fewer things that are going to alter you carry than hp.
So, believe it or not, I appreciate having the bulk system in place to avoid adding/removing weights.
I believe you: what I question are peoples justifications on why it's better in general. I have no issue when people say it better for themselves.
It is not even a matter of math ability, just that I found the Encumbrance by weight system tedious and the bulk system is less so AFAIC.
Just because you do not see the need does not mean the need is not there.
Cool, I get your reason but your last point works both ways: just because it changes doesn't mean there was a need that required it to change. I'm ok with preferring it because you like it better: I have issues with someone saying it IS better because [fill in the blank], especially when it doesn't align with my personal experience with other using similar math.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.Believe it or not I would have asked the same question but he was faster. Where is the difference subtracting the hit for 29 damage from your 121 HP or taking your 10lb rope out of your 89lb backpack?That, nothing. Like I said, the problems of additional and subtraction don't start arriving until you start adding and subtracting triple digits, like when you're dragging something or figuring out how much capacity your new strength score gives you, and how that alters other statistics.
1 bulk from 5 is still easier than 10 from 89 though, even if both are well within people's capabiltiies.
How often are you adding or subtracting triple digits with weight, though? When you have to drag or carry someone? Which is how often?
And even if it's above some subjective value of "often enough", that's still not some onerous calculation or even a calculation at all (at least, not one that has to be done in the moment).
When you're figuring out your weight encumbrance (waaayyy back at character creation of the beginning of the adventure), figure out your max, what you're carrying, and what you have left over. I.e., I can carry 240 total, I'm currently carrying 95, so I have 145 left.
Now it's the middle of combat and I have to carry someone. They're 138 total.
138. 145. Which one is bigger?
That's not a calculation; it's just a comparison. You do more calculating with your hit points on a vastly far more regular basis. Even at 1st level.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It changed because the devs thought there was a need. I do not know if that specific point was tackled in the CRB playtest surveys though.
AFAIC, I disliked weight so much (especially calculating the load at 1st level) that I usually did not bother with its changes and their impact on encumbrance : I just went and found a way to not have to worry about it.
Bulk just feels less complicated and ominous to me. So, I less mind following bulk and encumbrance than I did following weight and encumbrance. It is likely merely psychological, but it is real nonetheless.
In a way, Bulk is like the price units. And I see noone asking that everybody counts every value in cps.
Graystone, you have demonstrated an unwillingness to listen or, frankly, believe anything you're being told. You may as well stop asking me anything.Believe it or not I would have asked the same question but he was faster. Where is the difference subtracting the hit for 29 damage from your 121 HP or taking your 10lb rope out of your 89lb backpack?That, nothing. Like I said, the problems of additional and subtraction don't start arriving until you start adding and subtracting triple digits, like when you're dragging something or figuring out how much capacity your new strength score gives you, and how that alters other statistics.
1 bulk from 5 is still easier than 10 from 89 though, even if both are well within people's capabiltiies.
How often are you adding or subtracting triple digits with weight, though? When you have to drag or carry someone? Which is how often?
And even if it's above some subjective value of "often enough", that's still not some onerous calculation or even a calculation at all (at least, not one that has to be done in the moment).
When you're figuring out your weight encumbrance (waaayyy back at character creation of the beginning of the adventure), figure out your max, what you're carrying, and what you have left over. I.e., I can carry 240 total, I'm currently carrying 95, so I have 145 left.
Now it's the middle of combat and I have to carry someone. They're 138 total.
138. 145. Which one is bigger?
That's not a calculation; it's just a comparison. You do more calculating with your hit points on a vastly far more regular basis. Even at 1st level.
Where did the 145 come from though? Are you able to glance at your sheet and get that? Because most people can't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't wish to continue, fine. I'll assume you made a good faith even if you aren't willing to give me that much. Later.
It isn't that I think you're asking in bad faith, it's that we're trying to describe the color purple to you. That you also starting making insults did not help my mood, I admit (correction, that you made a comparison I found insulting, I'll take your word for it that you weren't trying for that), but the real problem is that you are still asking a system that is not trying to make logical sense make logical sense.
I don't think bulk is objectively better. I think as an abstraction it is simpler to understand and make use of for the majority of players than using a list of weights. But that will, demonstrably, not be true of everyone.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding the HP element, part of the issue is that HP is seen as one equation at the time and tied to the excitement that comes with battle in a system.
Encumbrance changes tend to occur all at once and tend to include a number of calculations in a row, again, not saying it is hard but the mentality behind it is different.
It is also much easier to remember bulk values of weapons / armour as a gm or as a player.
Light armour is 1 bulk except padded which is L
Medium armour is 2 bulk
Heavy armour 3 bulk except full plate which is 4b
Ammunition is L per 10
Small/short weapons are L
The other 1h weapons are 1 bulk
2h weapons are 2 bulk
From a memorisation standpoint it is super easy, now people can look these things up or the GM can have weight values at hand when prepping loot. But it is so simple with bulk that players tend to instinctively pick up the pattern without being told in play (atleast in my experience)
For the record I loath that rations are tracked in weeks now, but that is something else that was streamlined because people don't like tracking food by day. My liking it another way doesn't change the validity of paizo's middle ground solution.