Community

How do you manage arrows in your champaign?


How many arrows do you let your players carry? How many arrows can fit into a quiver?


I play a campaign in the wilderness, getting into a city or a shop is a rare event, so my players can't regularly find ammunitions.

Do you use any skill to let them create arrows?


Thank you for your suggestions

   


           

We don't fuss with tracking minutia like mundane ammunition.  It's simply not worth the effort.

Arrows come in a quiver that holds thirty arrows. 

As Salla said. 

Dec 9, 2012 -- 3:10PM, Dirz wrote:

1.  How do you manage arrows in your champaign?
2.  How many arrows do you let your players carry?
3.  How many arrows can fit into a quiver?
4.  I play a campaign in the wilderness, getting into a city or a shop is a rare event, so my players can't regularly find ammunitions.
5.  Do you use any skill to let them create arrows?

1. They keep track.
2.  As many as they want to.  Players usually stock up a couple hundred if they don't see town too often.
3.  It says in that () after the quiver.
4.  Then you should probably not pay attention to it.  Some players like to micromanage.  I know I always do when I'm a player with arrows.  It's not like a ranger can't do anything without ammo.  There's always the abilities that melee.
5.  There isn't one in 4e.  But if you want them to take an active part...Maybe a d20+level for an hour's worth of arrow crafting.  Result equals the amount of arrows.

Dec 9, 2012 -- 4:09PM, Salla wrote:

We don't fuss with tracking minutia like mundane ammunition.  It's simply not worth the effort.

Ditto.

Dec 9, 2012 -- 4:09PM, Salla wrote:

We don't fuss with tracking minutia like mundane ammunition.  It's simply not worth the effort.

Ditto.  I deduct a few GP per level for them (or, more often, simply didn't buy something if it would leave me with onyl a few GP left) until such time as I can get an endless quiver or some other form of thing which makes me not use them.

I don't keep track of minutiae like arrows, tavern lodging and mundane food, and my players don't keep track of minor treasure like mundane weapons and armor in exchange. 

Using the default treasure allocations in 4e, a Ranger who hits level 2 has enough money to buy all the arrows he will ever need if he plays all the way to Epic, assuming 7 combat encounter per level, an average of six attacks per round, and combats that average 5.5 rounds. And by level 9, he can trivially afford a Bag of Holding to put them all with literally pocket change.

So keeping track is just busywork.

All that others have said +1.  Just don't worry about it.

However I will say that crafting magic arrows can actaually be pretty interesting if your player wants to get into it.  I have a PC in one of my games that really wanted to make something interesting from his slain magical enemies and he imbues some of their spirits into magical arrows (following the rules for create magic item ritual).  Its fun and doesn't add too much complexity or minutia.  The only downside is if the PC either wants all his arrows to be +10 arrows of slaying or wants you to come up with interesting new arrow ideas every session. 

Past first or second level, it's not really worth keep tracking of. Same with food, since it's so cheap and easy to come by. (What? You're out of rations? Nature/Dungeoneering check, ta da, you've found something edible.)

Now, if you're running a low level zombie apocalypse campaign with lots of dangerous-in-melee monsters, hehehe... Then keeping track can add to the experience. I've actually been meaning to do that for a while now...


Though no one in my latest group uses a ranged weapon. Swordmage, two-weapon Ranger, even the Bard runs into melee, despite being made of paper. The only non-melee member is the Invoker... Come to think of it, even their Companion is a melee oriented Druid. And I never used Artillery monsters... Hmmm...

Dec 10, 2012 -- 3:33PM, KColette wrote:

Now, if you're running a low level zombie apocalypse campaign with lots of dangerous-in-melee monsters, hehehe... Then keeping track can add to the experience. I've actually been meaning to do that for a while now...

Not really.  In that situation, I'd switch to a magic thrown weapon (or, any other non-arrow-using class,f or that matter).  Welp, tension burst. 

Deciding that you're going to stuff over the one guy in the party who actually uses resources on an ongoing basis, for doing his job, is not good DMing.

Having said that - there might story moments where it is relevant - eg. imprisoned and breaking out with scrounged equipment - -

 As far as how many arrows a character can carry, even before getting a bag of holding, we once actually worked out that a character could easily conveniently carry enough materials (shafts, feathers, heads, thread, glue) for more than 200 arrows, and simply assemble them as needed during extended rests. A ranger or other archer with an appropriate skill could most likely forage for all the materials they'd need to create their own arrows and never pay for a single one, ever.

I have also, in the past, houseruled that magical bows, crossbows, and slings create their own nonmagical ammunition.

Dec 10, 2012 -- 4:46PM, thespaceinvader wrote:

Dec 10, 2012 -- 3:33PM, KColette wrote:

Now, if you're running a low level zombie apocalypse campaign with lots of dangerous-in-melee monsters, hehehe... Then keeping track can add to the experience. I've actually been meaning to do that for a while now...

Not really.  In that situation, I'd switch to a magic thrown weapon (or, any other non-arrow-using class,f or that matter).  Welp, tension burst. 

Deciding that you're going to stuff over the one guy in the party who actually uses resources on an ongoing basis, for doing his job, is not good DMing.

That is assuming those classes are available. ;p

After all, in a zombie apocalypse scenario, any controller (and some non-controllers with lots of area powers, like the Sorcerer) can utterly break the tension. Any divine class will trivialize the threat.

That is ALSO assuming magic thrown weapons are available. As opposed to, say, Inherent Bonus system and generic, non-magical daggers.

And it's not 'stuffing over the one guy'. If you include making the monsters especially dangerous in melee, it's "making it tough on everyone, even the guy outside their threat range." It's not bad DM, it's ensuring everyone has a reason to be stressed in an adventure that is supposed to make the PCs feel stressed. In which case, it's good DMing.

I suppose I could have been better about sharing that information for the scenario, but I didn't want to derail the thread too much. Like I'm doing now. Ah well.

Dec 10, 2012 -- 9:40PM, KColette wrote:

[

That is ALSO assuming magic thrown weapons are available. As opposed to, say, Inherent Bonus system and generic, non-magical daggers.

I'd play an artificer.

Dec 10, 2012 -- 9:40PM, KColette wrote:

Dec 10, 2012 -- 4:46PM, thespaceinvader wrote:

Dec 10, 2012 -- 3:33PM, KColette wrote:

Now, if you're running a low level zombie apocalypse campaign with lots of dangerous-in-melee monsters, hehehe... Then keeping track can add to the experience. I've actually been meaning to do that for a while now...

Not really.  In that situation, I'd switch to a magic thrown weapon (or, any other non-arrow-using class,f or that matter).  Welp, tension burst. 

Deciding that you're going to stuff over the one guy in the party who actually uses resources on an ongoing basis, for doing his job, is not good DMing.

That is assuming those classes are available. ;p

After all, in a zombie apocalypse scenario, any controller (and some non-controllers with lots of area powers, like the Sorcerer) can utterly break the tension. Any divine class will trivialize the threat.

That is ALSO assuming magic thrown weapons are available. As opposed to, say, Inherent Bonus system and generic, non-magical daggers.

And it's not 'stuffing over the one guy'. If you include making the monsters especially dangerous in melee, it's "making it tough on everyone, even the guy outside their threat range." It's not bad DM, it's ensuring everyone has a reason to be stressed in an adventure that is supposed to make the PCs feel stressed. In which case, it's good DMing.

I suppose I could have been better about sharing that information for the scenario, but I didn't want to derail the thread too much. Like I'm doing now. Ah well.

If the monsters are especially dangerous in melee range, that's not stuffing over the melee guys, it's stuffing over the whole party equally.  Melee range monsters quickly get into melee range with everyone unless adequately controlled or defended, which is a matter of whole-party tactics.  Making the one guy in the party who needs resources, track resources when no-one else needs or tracks them, is the very definition of stuffing that guy over to his detriment but no-one else's.  Unless you're also ruling that the fighter's weapons break, and the wizard runs out of bat poop, don't make the archer run out of arrows - because when he does, his character breaks and he might as well go home.  A ranged-weapon character who runs out of projectiles, is useless in this game.  Pure and simple.  Making a PC useless makes the player useless, so why would he keep playing if it came up?

Dec 10, 2012 -- 5:28PM, Mad_Jack wrote:

A ranger or other archer with an appropriate skill could most likely forage for all the materials they'd need to create their own arrows

Or they could loot them from fallen enemies. Or they could repair used ammo. Or (worst case) use damaged/used ammo as an improvised weapon.

But yes: things like arrows, food, water, air, sleep, fatigue, warmth, shaving, ablutions, etc. are not worried about unless the scenario calls for it.

Most people don't track breathing for their characters.  Arrows are much the same.

I don't bother tracking with mundane ammo, Magic ammo however is another matter.