Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Aidan Warren's avatar

I think you took the abstract adventuring gear idea a tad too far. Simplifying inventory, weight management, and shopping by flattening the prices and weights of tools into one thing? That sounds like a helpful expedient which decreases complexity a lot without reducing depth. Where I draw the line is simply saying "I bring 15 pieces of Adventuring Gear" and then, as problems are encountered, simply declaring that one of the pieces of gear you brought solves the problem. Interesting puzzles and conundrums become bland toll-booths. I think there are two reasons we love using tools to overcome problems in OSR: Anticipation payoff, and bounded creativity.

By anticipation payoff, I mean that when the player is shopping for gear, they anticipate using it. The thief salivates as they purchase their ball bearings because they have already imagined a bakers-dozen situations they can deploy them in. Using the ball bearings later feels much more satisfying because it is the payoff to the anticipation you felt when you bought them. Abstract adventuring gear removes the anticipation because the gear could be used for *anything*, and without anticipation there is no payoff.

By bounded creativity, I mean being creative within a set of limitations. In this case, the limitations are the gear that the party brought with along. This kind of exercise is one that, I think, our brains are particularly suited for. A blank pages is terrifying, but a writing prompt is fun. Abstract adventuring gear replaces the concrete list of tools available to the party with an open-ended question of "what will the GM let me get away with". I also see potential for player-GM conflict here, because again, ultimately the only limit on what adventuring gear can be is whatever the player could imagine having in their backpack at the time.

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts