I'm suggesting that there be a look at the encumberance mechanics, in particular for the smaller races.

I find it kind of hard that a gnome with 50 str is encumbered wearing nothing but normal clothing a staff and a couple items in their pack. Shouldnt this just be slightly under encumbered? maybe still able to hold another 5lbs?

If the gnome had 20 str I can see this working properly, but sitting at 50 shouldnt be this big of an issue.

if the gnome had 100 str I dont see why they couldnt wear their normal clothing a weapon and or shield, plus 25lbs or more.

I understand that items are generally made for larger character but what gnomes wear arent big people sized and should be worn comfortably.

I'm not saying gnomes should carry 3-5 chests like the heartier races, but gnomes should still be able to carry 1-2, which seems reasonable to me.

This are the thresholds I'm seeing when I imagine stats for str...

25 = weak gnome - normal clothing + equipment
50 = average gnome - normal clothing + equipment + 10 lbs
75 = fit gnome - normal clothing + equipment + 20 lbs
100= strong gnome normal clothing + equipment + 30 lbs

these numbers are just the idea I'm trying to convey, not the actual statistic that will end up meshing with the other mechanics in the game.
I'm hoping that maybe this will give a good picture that something could be done.

My burghal gnome ranger can carry quite a bit with an 85 strength (strength bonus = 2). I still have to pay attention to what I am carrying but it's definitely not ridiculous (I have quite a lot of junk in addition to my 'standard items'). The issue for people with smaller races is when they decide to set their strength very low. So at 50 strength as a burghal gnome you would have a penalty of -15 and at 30 strength you would have a penalty of -25. Working with those types of penalties with a small race can be rather crippling.

One suggestion would be to consider keeping the system as it is (I think it works fairly well in general) but halve the impact from negative strength bonuses so that super low strength (or low strenght bonus) characters would be closer to 'average' early on.

-- Robert

Bazzelwyn says, "Maul maul maul maul maul maul maul."
Bazzelwyn says, "The answer is maul."

I definitely agree with the OP that it should be improved. The only place where size is taken into account is with the armor system, in which smaller races are penalized AGAIN.

Is a cloak for giantkin the same size as one for gnomes? A claidhmore? Weapons and worn containers should have the size factor applied to their weights. This way, gnomes wearing a 7lb greatcloak would only be encumbered 3.5 lbs.


My gnome has a 96 strength and without Armor Support or Strength, 1000 silver will push him into encumbrance.

The person who mentioned their ranger -- keep in mind 606 is equivalent +10 strength bonus.

>The small races have a large benefit to maneuvers due to their small size. In addition to the enhancive system, they also have the encumbrance reducing items that were introduced into the game through various rewards. If anything, it's easier to play them now than it has ever been.

The bonuses to maneuvers are pretty much nullified with one box. They should not have to rely on SimuCoin items as a fix.

>The bonuses to maneuvers are pretty much nullified with one box. They should not have to rely on SimuCoin items as a fix.

One box ...after their disk is filled, and they manage to override the benefits of all outside spells which benefit their carrying capacity, as well as any enhancives they have to further increase their strength. THEN they also turn down a SimuCoin (and other means) option to further help their situation.

Gnome? No. Halfling, yes.

You mean a character based around being tiny actually has penalties associated with their small size? Mind=BLOWN

>The small races have many many pros to help offset the encumbrance con and a lot of them were listed above.

except the small race benefit is too easily nullified.

The problem for me is one of scale. No one is saying small races shouldn't be weaker. None of the other racial benefits operate on an order of magnitude like encumbrance does. A +5 to LOG or -10 STR bonus will generally be a pretty small bonus in areas of the game where these things take effect. For example, -10 AS from the strength malus is going to be a fairly small % of your total attack numbers.

Whatever that 'excellent maneuver bonus' is, I assure you halflings are not dodging every maneuver attack that goes their way. I get webbed regularly with my halfling. Training choices have a MUCH higher effect than any racial modifiers. And when they do get hit, low hp totals really come into effect.

Now look at the encumbrance numbers. A maxed giant can carry 145.8 lbs. Halfing? 48lbs. Do you think halflings are dodging or doing anything else 3 TIMES better than a giant?

A small race basically needs maxed STR/CON to be barely playable, and even then they require constant outside help to be able to function. If you aren't MAing, this can be a serious burden, especially in less populated areas.

Not sure what formula you are using..
What I see is that Giantkin have -5 to dexterity bonus and -5 agility bonus, negated simply by using 20 points to get the base rt on any weapon.
https://gswiki.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/RT

On the other hand, smaller races would have to almost max out str and con to be fairly unencumbered. Not to mention that smaller races receive a permanent weight penalty to all items. For smaller races (weight factor < 0.50)*(str+con)+(base weight < 40), meaning that smaller races have less than .5 for their weight factor. Perhaps if the weight factor was increased by .1 for the smaller races it would help balance this somewhat. The next highest weight factor is .68, seems like a big leap, with all things considered.

thanks for all the comments from everyone.

With everything everyone has said here, there are other things that could be balanced somewhat, but with this topic in mind, I would just like the designers with Gemstone to take another fair and honest look at encumbrance, particularly for smaller races.

One thing they could do for encumbrance system would be to change disks from an item limit to a weight limit (or a combined Item and weight limit where both have to be met for it to be full). If a disk could carry 50 pounds instead of 8? items it would be a lot better in most cases....or if locked containers counted as one item, that could work too.

I CAN see bradntjrt's idea useful...

>As a general thought about races, encumbrance, and carrying cool stuff, what if everyone was able to carry an additional x lbs before the regular system kicked in? 10 lbs for everyone, for instance, would mean just a little bit for Giantmen, but it would be a noticeable amount for a Gnome.
BRANDTJRT

I would certainly consider that to be a positive change. Also the idea of moving up the weights for the gnomes/halflings since there is a fairly large gap between them and the elves.

I still like my idea of using size factor on weapons and anything wearable in the gnome's inventory. This way they are still punished on box-carrying capacity but at least they can dress and arm themselves in a reasonable way. (also STOP applying it to armor weight. Let everyone benefit equally from lightening rather than giving giants another +3-5 lbs they really don't need and taking away more from the shortlings who are desperate for it.)

Or raise the effect of the stat influence. A 100 STR/CON gnome would be the equivalent of a mini Arnold Schwarzenegger. To have him almost encumbered by basic clothing is ridiculous.

I would seriously pity any new player who picked one of these races without knowing what they were getting into.

That has more to do with the value::weight ratio problems in the treasure system which I would 100% be in favor of improving.

I bet your giant was able to at least START your hunting unencumbered. I'm looking at my halfling right now who is 'somewhat' encumbered because he's holding a heavy quartz orb. No silver, no boxes.