Counting arrows?

[Heilemann]

Yeah, I like that approach too. Very nice.

[Rich H]

I think the notion of being out of arrows on an Eye result is a simple one and should work well in practice.

... I really don't think an EYE result should mean running out of arrows. If a character knew they were down to their last one (or two) arrows then they may conserve them or save them for a cleaner shot, for example. To go from a player character having arrows to spare to no arrows at all actually seems immersion breaking. I think if using this rule it should be used sparingly and an EYE result should mean the character has one arrow left.

[PipeSmoker]

I disregarded counting arrows at first, leftovers from previous games I thought.
I've quite changed my mind... Helm's Deep features this situation in the book and it could be some sort of "fun" in the game as stated previously.
What about a Success die left in your quiver after rolling an EYE?
This is just tinkering and sharing ideas, the general idea is appealing!

[Evening]

This is puzzling to me. I didn't realize that making a tally mark for each arrow used was a game breaker for alot of people. We have to keep track of endurance, fatigue, xp, and AP, which sounds labourious, but we all know it isn't. As I said... puzzling.

[Woodclaw]

I think the notion of being out of arrows on an Eye result is a simple one and should work well in practice.

... I really don't think an EYE result should mean running out of arrows. If a character knew they were down to their last one (or two) arrows then they may conserve them or save them for a cleaner shot, for example. To go from a player character having arrows to spare to no arrows at all actually seems immersion breaking. I think if using this rule it should be used sparingly and an EYE result should mean the character has one arrow left.

As much as I hate it as a game, I think we can take a page from Dungeon World and tweak Dave suggestion a bit.

• the rule like this: a archer start with 3-4 "arrows" in his quiver, representing bundle of arrows;
• every time he rolls a EYE he has to spend one arrow or switch weapon, this represent the archer unbundling a different bundle of arrows after he run out/spill its quiver or else;
• a Craft roll might be attempted to replace a used "arrow" with extra level of success awarding extra "arrows" (up to a maximum determined by the LM, I suggest 6)

[Looping]

Many good ideas and very productive discussion.

... I really don't think an EYE result should mean running out of arrows. If a character knew they were down to their last one (or two) arrows then they may conserve them or save them for a cleaner shot, for example. To go from a player character having arrows to spare to no arrows at all actually seems immersion breaking. I think if using this rule it should be used sparingly and an EYE result should mean the character has one arrow left. [emphasis added]

I think this approach is a good compromise because it still conveys a sense of urgency and realism, i.e. "arrow supply is not infinite," and it is less sudden (and less passive-aggressive) than, "Well, that was your last arrow. What do you mean you did not know?"

I completely agree with the principle of using this rule sparingly and the loremaster may decide that the bow string breaks or that the character shoots one of his/her companions instead of the intended enemy, etc.

I also like the idea of the arrow bundle very much. The Lord of the the Ring and the Hobbit, not to mention the Silmarillon, are pretty epic pieces so I do not think having an arrow counter is very immersive. Heroes slay enemies without regard for how much strength or ammunition they have left. The bundle is a clever idea; the unit is vague enough to represent how many arrow one has left at any given time and it is one less thing to keep track of. Between endurance, hope, and battle dice I believe there are enough things to manage.
Suggestion: Rolling an eye when using the last bundle of arrows means the character realizes that he/she has 1d3 arrows left in his/her quiver.

[jolt]

No, we don't. Unless the adventure or situation is specifically about being low on resources I find endless inventory management to be a waste of our (seemingly) ever-decreasing game time. In any game, my experience has been that the more "things" a PC has to keep track of himself, the less tension and immersion the player feels. At best, it just takes up time and at worst it can lead to mind-numbing metagaming (e.g. "Oh, by the way, my character picked up an Ash bow at Rivendell since it has a +1 sproinginess factor over Yew. I forgot to mention it but my character would have remembered. What do you mean there's no sproinginess factor? Historically, these were important decisions!"). If you enjoy that kind of thing in your game then knock yourself out but I don't. There are games where such things are hard-wired into the rules and I don't care for it there either. Tension should come from the story not from the player worrying that his arrow count is slightly sub-optimal for the median number of encounters/day.