Mt campaigns tend to be loose on ressources management, i don't tightly track ammunitions, rations, spell components etc, assuming an insignificant ammount of coins is spent to reimplish them whenever going back to town.
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
That appears to be the official idea.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Sure, you can interpret that in other ways and for a campaign where part of the challenge is making it through without convenient ways to resupply it might be appropriate to restrict the amount of spells that can be cast before the pouch runs out, but as you say: most people go for a focus anyway. I don't think it's supposed to be anything more than a flavour thing. If you have your component pouch you have your components and they don't run out, with the exception of anything that has a specific price.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The only ammunition my DM tracks is magical, just to ensure we don't have an unlimited supply of poison arrows or something.
For me not tracking ammunition doesn't mean you have an unlimited supply, but rather that you can recover half all your expended ammunition at the end of the battle, by taking a minute to search the battlefield. This includes magical ammunitions.
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
That appears to be the official idea.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Sure, you can interpret that in other ways and for a campaign where part of the challenge is making it through without convenient ways to resupply it might be appropriate to restrict the amount of spells that can be cast before the pouch runs out, but as you say: most people go for a focus anyway. I don't think it's supposed to be anything more than a flavour thing. If you have your component pouch you have your components and they don't run out, with the exception of anything that has a specific price.
Yeah, component pouches have always been kind of a grey area for me. I do agree that a focus, familiar or pouch shouls usually be enough, but if there's a spell that requires 500 gp to cast, I would consult your DM
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
That appears to be the official idea.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Sure, you can interpret that in other ways and for a campaign where part of the challenge is making it through without convenient ways to resupply it might be appropriate to restrict the amount of spells that can be cast before the pouch runs out, but as you say: most people go for a focus anyway. I don't think it's supposed to be anything more than a flavour thing. If you have your component pouch you have your components and they don't run out, with the exception of anything that has a specific price.
I'm curious if prior editions had focuses? They kind of feel like something 5E might have added to simplify things for people not wanting to keep track of all the individual things, but still leaving the different material components in for people who like tracking it or who just prefer the RP of pulling out the individual items. Who just have more fun say pulling out that petrified newt from a pouch rather than waving an orb around in their hand.
No idea if that hunch is accurate or not, but for some reason I kind of get that vibe from the way focuses work but still keeping in component pouches.
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
That appears to be the official idea.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Sure, you can interpret that in other ways and for a campaign where part of the challenge is making it through without convenient ways to resupply it might be appropriate to restrict the amount of spells that can be cast before the pouch runs out, but as you say: most people go for a focus anyway. I don't think it's supposed to be anything more than a flavour thing. If you have your component pouch you have your components and they don't run out, with the exception of anything that has a specific price.
I'm curious if prior editions had focuses? They kind of feel like something 5E might have added to simplify things for people not wanting to keep track of all the individual things, but still leaving the different material components in for people who like tracking it or who just prefer the RP of pulling out the individual items. Who just have more fun say pulling out that petrified newt from a pouch rather than waving an orb around in their hand.
No idea if that hunch is accurate or not, but for some reason I kind of get that vibe from the way focuses work but still keeping in component pouches.
Probably depends on the edition. From what I've heard, the earliest editions may not have even had components, due to the simplicity of it. I would think at that stage they would just be like "you cast the spell. good job" but again, that's a guess. I know later editions like 3.5 and 4 may have made things a bit more complex, in terms of combat and spellcasting, but in since I've only played 5e, I'm not really an authority on this.
So I track everything closely, or rather I realy on my players to track things - but I will audit from time to time. For me, a character keeping their sheets up to date is a sign of good engagement and taking an active role in managing thir part of the campaign.
Obviously, it is not equally relevant at all times, but I do run a grittier campaign where there isn't a shop on every corner - and supplies can generally be limiting. This is especially relevant for longer forays into the wild. Sure characters can forage, but it's turning winter, and there aren't many berries or nuts left to harvest, and hunting might take longer. For me it adds a level of immersion and actually agency for players as well to prepare and feel it pay off when they did go out of the way to ensure they brought pitons.
But each to their own - and I can see why some wouldn't enjoy it.
I have mixed feelings on components. I like them in concept. I agree with pavilionaire that some spells need limiters, and costly components can increase resource cost and scarcity. Also, just in terms of flavour, some of the required materials are actually pretty funny. Tongues requires a clay model of a ziggurat (seems to be a Tower of Babel reference). Phantasmal Force requires a bit of fleece (fleece also being a verb for trickery and deception).
If it were a solo game, actually having to hunt for ingredients or find suppliers might actually be fun. As a group game, trying to figure out where to get some of them while in remote locations without decent access to shops or a direct source seems annoying. And being cut off from spells feels like it puts a significant limitation on casters. The spell focus and component pouch let you sort of mechanically gloss over that limitation. I'm grateful, but as a matter of personal taste, that sort of substitution leaves me unsatisfied in a magical system.
As it stands, I don't feel much need to change or modify the system though. I hate spells with consumable priced components because I hate the idea of managing that resource. But I like that they exist because the fact that I ignore them becomes part of my character and the choices they make. Sometimes the spells I refuse to use are as much a part of RP as those I choose to use.
Yeah I don't enjoy trying to manage component resources. It can be a time waster, but like it's been said, some spells need restrictions. I feel like the spellcaster classes are limited enough without having to spend extra time and money (this goes especially for wizards) to hunt down the stuff they need to cast their spells. Sure, fighters and martial classes need to buy weapons and ammo, but that's nowhere near as expensive and time consuming. Thought in a special case like casting an ultra powerful spell of casting one spell over and over for several days, I would have some kind of requirement
Plate Armor is 1500 gp. A crystal ball for scrying is 1000 gp and is not consumed by the spell. If you look at components that are consumed, it's not really comparable. It's all over the map from 50 gp for Teleportation Circle to 300 gp for Revivify to 1000 gp per use for Awaken: basically in inverse proportion to how frequently you would want to cast those spells.
Martial classes also need magic weapons, which might or might not be part of the economy in your game. At least when you find some loot the martial guys can take the magic weapons and the casters can take the gold or diamonds for spell components.
Different classes do have different expense requirements. My party operates on a semi-socialist basis. I'm Scrying to get information for my party on a daily basis, and our Wizard gets us all where we need to go with Teleportation Circle. They chipped in for my scrying vessel, and we throw some gold the Wizard's way for fancy sidewalk chalk.
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
That appears to be the official idea.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Sure, you can interpret that in other ways and for a campaign where part of the challenge is making it through without convenient ways to resupply it might be appropriate to restrict the amount of spells that can be cast before the pouch runs out, but as you say: most people go for a focus anyway. I don't think it's supposed to be anything more than a flavour thing. If you have your component pouch you have your components and they don't run out, with the exception of anything that has a specific price.
I'm curious if prior editions had focuses? They kind of feel like something 5E might have added to simplify things for people not wanting to keep track of all the individual things, but still leaving the different material components in for people who like tracking it or who just prefer the RP of pulling out the individual items. Who just have more fun say pulling out that petrified newt from a pouch rather than waving an orb around in their hand.
No idea if that hunch is accurate or not, but for some reason I kind of get that vibe from the way focuses work but still keeping in component pouches.
4e did, but they didn't have components. A focus was basically a spellcaster's weapon, so it was the thing you looked to upgrade with magical versions as you leveled. 5e is kind of a fusion of that and the component system.
I think the thing keeping me from focusing on resource management (aside from the extra bookkeeping) is that there are too many ways to circumvent the problems with magic, even at low levels. If I were to tell my players that the next campaign focuses on survival, they'd make characters with goodberry, create or destroy water, etc. Then when they use them, it's hard to make those feel like satisfying and rewarding choices rather than just a spell slot tax.
I have mixed feelings on components. I like them in concept. I agree with pavilionaire that some spells need limiters, and costly components can increase resource cost and scarcity. Also, just in terms of flavour, some of the required materials are actually pretty funny. Tongues requires a clay model of a ziggurat (seems to be a Tower of Babel reference). Phantasmal Force requires a bit of fleece (fleece also being a verb for trickery and deception).
If it were a solo game, actually having to hunt for ingredients or find suppliers might actually be fun. As a group game, trying to figure out where to get some of them while in remote locations without decent access to shops or a direct source seems annoying. And being cut off from spells feels like it puts a significant limitation on casters. The spell focus and component pouch let you sort of mechanically gloss over that limitation. I'm grateful, but as a matter of personal taste, that sort of substitution leaves me unsatisfied in a magical system.
As it stands, I don't feel much need to change or modify the system though. I hate spells with consumable priced components because I hate the idea of managing that resource. But I like that they exist because the fact that I ignore them becomes part of my character and the choices they make. Sometimes the spells I refuse to use are as much a part of RP as those I choose to use.
Yeah I don't enjoy trying to manage component resources. It can be a time waster, but like it's been said, some spells need restrictions. I feel like the spellcaster classes are limited enough without having to spend extra time and money (this goes especially for wizards) to hunt down the stuff they need to cast their spells. Sure, fighters and martial classes need to buy weapons and ammo, but that's nowhere near as expensive and time consuming. Thought in a special case like casting an ultra powerful spell of casting one spell over and over for several days, I would have some kind of requirement
Plate Armor is 1500 gp. A crystal ball for scrying is 1000 gp and is not consumed by the spell. If you look at components that are consumed, it's not really comparable. It's all over the map from 50 gp for Teleportation Circle to 300 gp for Revivify to 1000 gp per use for Awaken: basically in inverse proportion to how frequently you would want to cast those spells.
Martial classes also need magic weapons, which might or might not be part of the economy in your game. At least when you find some loot the martial guys can take the magic weapons and the casters can take the gold or diamonds for spell components.
Different classes do have different expense requirements. My party operates on a semi-socialist basis. I'm Scrying to get information for my party on a daily basis, and our Wizard gets us all where we need to go with Teleportation Circle. They chipped in for my scrying vessel, and we throw some gold the Wizard's way for fancy sidewalk chalk.
I mean, yeah, armor and weapon are expensive, but we kind of changed that in our campaign because with the amount of adventurers and people buying weapons and armor in the world, 1500 for plate is a little bogus. Like I said before, a lot of parties might want to do it your way, in a very cost efficient and shared way (the system you described isn't socialist; but that's a story for another day), but some parties don't enjoy doing a lot of figuring and cash distribution. This is why I like the freedom of the 5e system. Play however you want so long as it is fun for you
As it stands, I don't feel much need to change or modify the system though. I hate spells with consumable priced components because I hate the idea of managing that resource. But I like that they exist because the fact that I ignore them becomes part of my character and the choices they make. Sometimes the spells I refuse to use are as much a part of RP as those I choose to use.
I don't mind consumable priced components on higher-level or rarer spells. It just means they can't be cast casually -- you have to plan for them.
The ones that bug me are the relatively high-cost components on low-level spells, even if they aren't consumed, like the pearl for identify or the diamond for chromatic orb. I don't get why useful, common spells would be gated like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
With Identify, I'm almost surprised it isn't a consumable item with a lower GP cost. If we're just talking identifying random item drops, sure, it's relatively minor. But it has the potential to reveal a fair bit of useful information, and in some campaigns possibly short circuit part of a mystery.
Yes, I'd have expected Identify to be like Find Familiar in that regard.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I typically go pretty loose on (physical) resource management unless I'm doing a campaign where resources are particularly short. But then, I don't typically let players buy magical items, at least not for money. There's typically very little that falls in between "freely available" and "adventure hook" for me.
(the system you described isn't socialist; but that's a story for another day)
I've got time.
It would be capitalist if each time the wizard gave us a trip on his Teleportation Circle, he charged us for tickets, and took a profit.
It's socialist because we don't ask for magic services as a quid pro quo, but in service of a shared goal without anything expected in return.
It's at least employee-owned.
Somtimes you can have community interest or communal good without attaching an ism to it. Plenty of social affinity groups, clubs, societies, fraternal orders have "community chests" I think there's even a card in Monopoly.... But I'm just joking around and not really interested in digressing into political economy in discussion of game resource management.
I sort of eyeball costs of production when determining whether components matter. Wizards, clerics and Druids and Warlocks. However Sorcerers don't require material components, I presume the magic is actually imbued in them and thus don't need to engage in any other weave engineering to draw forth the effect they want. Think about it, the Aberrant mind is supposed to be a psionicist, so while Sorcerers study to hone their abilities, the magic is literally within them. I go back and forth on clerics in this regard, but lean the idea that their gods do require a material token to tap into the divinity ... though I may change up the component to be more reflective of the god ... and some gods are more charitable than others. I guess, like coin, I do treat them more as an element that's integrated into the story rather than some sort of box checking accounting (and for what it's worth, while my party that's embedded in the banking and the money laundering, there is one character who is sort of the manager, but he relies on their bankers "statements" so to speak on their spending ability ... also being a black market bank sometimes the funds are tied up in "other 'tings."
(the system you described isn't socialist; but that's a story for another day)
I've got time.
It would be capitalist if each time the wizard gave us a trip on his Teleportation Circle, he charged us for tickets, and took a profit.
It's socialist because we don't ask for magic services as a quid pro quo, but in service of a shared goal without anything expected in return.
It's at least employee-owned.
also being a black market bank sometimes the funds are tied up in "other 'tings."
"I mean, the funds ain't exactly liquid right now, boss, if you know what I mean. Actually they are liquid - we traded your stash for a truckload of orcish whiskey."
(the system you described isn't socialist; but that's a story for another day)
I've got time.
It would be capitalist if each time the wizard gave us a trip on his Teleportation Circle, he charged us for tickets, and took a profit.
It's socialist because we don't ask for magic services as a quid pro quo, but in service of a shared goal without anything expected in return.
It's at least employee-owned.
also being a black market bank sometimes the funds are tied up in "other 'tings."
"I mean, the funds ain't exactly liquid right now, boss, if you know what I mean. Actually they are liquid - we traded your stash for a truckload of orcish whiskey."
If my players are in a town, they usually go to an inn and put down enough money for food and board for several days, so we don't really need to do any tracking there.
When they're out in the wilds, things are different. Everyone has to deduct one ration per day (usually at the end of the day, or whenever they make camp) if they don't have some other type of food to eat. I enjoy using terrain features to make food scarcer, such as if they submerge in water, all of their food, paper, torches and such are ruined by the water.
I banned goodberry from the campaign because it eliminates the need to pay attention to any kind of sustenance tracking, which is something that I want to exist. I think that Goodberry seems like it solves an issue, whilst actually takes away from some of the fun of resource management.
Spell components are generally never used because the only casters use foci instead of components pouches, but obviously those components with a gold cost like diamonds have to be tracked down. There are a limited number of 500gp+ diamonds in existence in the campaign area, and they are all hard to acquire.
Ammunition is something that I don't have time to keep track of, and to avoid having to ask "how many bolts can I recover" at the end of every fight, you can automatically recover ammunition that hit a target and shots that missed can't be recovered.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Mt campaigns tend to be loose on ressources management, i don't tightly track ammunitions, rations, spell components etc, assuming an insignificant ammount of coins is spent to reimplish them whenever going back to town.
The only ammunition my DM tracks is magical, just to ensure we don't have an unlimited supply of poison arrows or something.
Updog
For components I tend to assume that a component pouch just comes with every spell component anyway that doesn't have a specific price attached to it. And most people seem to go for a focus anyway.
That appears to be the official idea.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Sure, you can interpret that in other ways and for a campaign where part of the challenge is making it through without convenient ways to resupply it might be appropriate to restrict the amount of spells that can be cast before the pouch runs out, but as you say: most people go for a focus anyway. I don't think it's supposed to be anything more than a flavour thing. If you have your component pouch you have your components and they don't run out, with the exception of anything that has a specific price.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
For me not tracking ammunition doesn't mean you have an unlimited supply, but rather that you can recover
halfall your expended ammunition at the end of the battle, by taking a minute to search the battlefield. This includes magical ammunitions.Yeah, component pouches have always been kind of a grey area for me. I do agree that a focus, familiar or pouch shouls usually be enough, but if there's a spell that requires 500 gp to cast, I would consult your DM
Updog
I'm curious if prior editions had focuses? They kind of feel like something 5E might have added to simplify things for people not wanting to keep track of all the individual things, but still leaving the different material components in for people who like tracking it or who just prefer the RP of pulling out the individual items. Who just have more fun say pulling out that petrified newt from a pouch rather than waving an orb around in their hand.
No idea if that hunch is accurate or not, but for some reason I kind of get that vibe from the way focuses work but still keeping in component pouches.
Probably depends on the edition. From what I've heard, the earliest editions may not have even had components, due to the simplicity of it. I would think at that stage they would just be like "you cast the spell. good job" but again, that's a guess. I know later editions like 3.5 and 4 may have made things a bit more complex, in terms of combat and spellcasting, but in since I've only played 5e, I'm not really an authority on this.
Updog
So I track everything closely, or rather I realy on my players to track things - but I will audit from time to time. For me, a character keeping their sheets up to date is a sign of good engagement and taking an active role in managing thir part of the campaign.
Obviously, it is not equally relevant at all times, but I do run a grittier campaign where there isn't a shop on every corner - and supplies can generally be limiting. This is especially relevant for longer forays into the wild. Sure characters can forage, but it's turning winter, and there aren't many berries or nuts left to harvest, and hunting might take longer. For me it adds a level of immersion and actually agency for players as well to prepare and feel it pay off when they did go out of the way to ensure they brought pitons.
But each to their own - and I can see why some wouldn't enjoy it.
Plate Armor is 1500 gp. A crystal ball for scrying is 1000 gp and is not consumed by the spell. If you look at components that are consumed, it's not really comparable. It's all over the map from 50 gp for Teleportation Circle to 300 gp for Revivify to 1000 gp per use for Awaken: basically in inverse proportion to how frequently you would want to cast those spells.
Martial classes also need magic weapons, which might or might not be part of the economy in your game. At least when you find some loot the martial guys can take the magic weapons and the casters can take the gold or diamonds for spell components.
Different classes do have different expense requirements. My party operates on a semi-socialist basis. I'm Scrying to get information for my party on a daily basis, and our Wizard gets us all where we need to go with Teleportation Circle. They chipped in for my scrying vessel, and we throw some gold the Wizard's way for fancy sidewalk chalk.
4e did, but they didn't have components. A focus was basically a spellcaster's weapon, so it was the thing you looked to upgrade with magical versions as you leveled. 5e is kind of a fusion of that and the component system.
I think the thing keeping me from focusing on resource management (aside from the extra bookkeeping) is that there are too many ways to circumvent the problems with magic, even at low levels. If I were to tell my players that the next campaign focuses on survival, they'd make characters with goodberry, create or destroy water, etc. Then when they use them, it's hard to make those feel like satisfying and rewarding choices rather than just a spell slot tax.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I mean, yeah, armor and weapon are expensive, but we kind of changed that in our campaign because with the amount of adventurers and people buying weapons and armor in the world, 1500 for plate is a little bogus. Like I said before, a lot of parties might want to do it your way, in a very cost efficient and shared way (the system you described isn't socialist; but that's a story for another day), but some parties don't enjoy doing a lot of figuring and cash distribution. This is why I like the freedom of the 5e system. Play however you want so long as it is fun for you
Updog
I don't mind consumable priced components on higher-level or rarer spells. It just means they can't be cast casually -- you have to plan for them.
The ones that bug me are the relatively high-cost components on low-level spells, even if they aren't consumed, like the pearl for identify or the diamond for chromatic orb. I don't get why useful, common spells would be gated like that.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Yes, I'd have expected Identify to be like Find Familiar in that regard.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I've got time.
It would be capitalist if each time the wizard gave us a trip on his Teleportation Circle, he charged us for tickets, and took a profit.
It's socialist because we don't ask for magic services as a quid pro quo, but in service of a shared goal without anything expected in return.
It's at least employee-owned.
I typically go pretty loose on (physical) resource management unless I'm doing a campaign where resources are particularly short. But then, I don't typically let players buy magical items, at least not for money. There's typically very little that falls in between "freely available" and "adventure hook" for me.
Somtimes you can have community interest or communal good without attaching an ism to it. Plenty of social affinity groups, clubs, societies, fraternal orders have "community chests" I think there's even a card in Monopoly.... But I'm just joking around and not really interested in digressing into political economy in discussion of game resource management.
I sort of eyeball costs of production when determining whether components matter. Wizards, clerics and Druids and Warlocks. However Sorcerers don't require material components, I presume the magic is actually imbued in them and thus don't need to engage in any other weave engineering to draw forth the effect they want. Think about it, the Aberrant mind is supposed to be a psionicist, so while Sorcerers study to hone their abilities, the magic is literally within them. I go back and forth on clerics in this regard, but lean the idea that their gods do require a material token to tap into the divinity ... though I may change up the component to be more reflective of the god ... and some gods are more charitable than others. I guess, like coin, I do treat them more as an element that's integrated into the story rather than some sort of box checking accounting (and for what it's worth, while my party that's embedded in the banking and the money laundering, there is one character who is sort of the manager, but he relies on their bankers "statements" so to speak on their spending ability ... also being a black market bank sometimes the funds are tied up in "other 'tings."
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
"I mean, the funds ain't exactly liquid right now, boss, if you know what I mean. Actually they are liquid - we traded your stash for a truckload of orcish whiskey."
Socialism, capitalism, or whiskeyism
Updog
If my players are in a town, they usually go to an inn and put down enough money for food and board for several days, so we don't really need to do any tracking there.
When they're out in the wilds, things are different. Everyone has to deduct one ration per day (usually at the end of the day, or whenever they make camp) if they don't have some other type of food to eat. I enjoy using terrain features to make food scarcer, such as if they submerge in water, all of their food, paper, torches and such are ruined by the water.
I banned goodberry from the campaign because it eliminates the need to pay attention to any kind of sustenance tracking, which is something that I want to exist. I think that Goodberry seems like it solves an issue, whilst actually takes away from some of the fun of resource management.
Spell components are generally never used because the only casters use foci instead of components pouches, but obviously those components with a gold cost like diamonds have to be tracked down. There are a limited number of 500gp+ diamonds in existence in the campaign area, and they are all hard to acquire.
Ammunition is something that I don't have time to keep track of, and to avoid having to ask "how many bolts can I recover" at the end of every fight, you can automatically recover ammunition that hit a target and shots that missed can't be recovered.