# Encumbrance Display Bug \[Experimental Build\]

**URL:** <https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638>\
**Category:** The Garage\
**Created:** [August 9, 2013, 8:11pm UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638 "2013-08-09T20:11:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 8\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Cenobite](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.cataclysmdda.org/cenobite/32/101_2.png) [@Cenobite](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/Cenobite)\
**Post date:** [August 9, 2013, 8:11pm UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/1 "2013-08-09T20:11:08Z")

</div>

It seems that despite the clothing stating that it has an encumbrance total of 0, I still have 1 encumbrance point on my legs. I think that with the recent encumbrance changes, some display bugs with clothing over 1 encumbrance point have bugged out.

I first noticed this when when I tried on a raincoat and found out that it still counted towards my encumbrance total, despite displaying a ‘0 (fits)’

* * *

![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/cataclysmdda/original/1X/ec42a28c009484fbe02f1c6b12f9dda5c208cff9.png)

![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/cataclysmdda/original/1X/b6e8aa3d7fc365a720fbd21fd97897ff1a26582c.png)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ratha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/dfb087/32.png) [@Ratha](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/Ratha)\
**Post date:** [August 10, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/2 "2013-08-10T17:00:38Z")

</div>

I can confirm this existed in a ~2 day old curses build which i dont have any longer. Leather pants which was fitted at 0 seemed to still give +1 encumbrance. There was also a case where wearing fitted sneakers (-1?) didnt give a negative bonus at all if i recall correctly. I forgot to make a specific note regarding this.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![KA101](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/278dde/32.png) [@KA101](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/KA101)\
**Post date:** [August 10, 2013, 7:02pm UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/3 "2013-08-10T19:02:39Z")

</div>

I think they “fixed” something so that a) you can’t end up with negative encumbrance, and b) it no longer gives bonuses if somehow you do.

Problem is, Fitted sneakers no longer fulfill their guarantee to make you run faster and jump higher (at least they would have if z-levels were in!). ☹

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Nighthawk](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.cataclysmdda.org/nighthawk/32/896_2.png) [@Nighthawk](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/Nighthawk)\
**Post date:** [August 10, 2013, 11:41pm UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/4 "2013-08-10T23:41:20Z")

</div>

I think you can get extra encumbrance levels by wearing too much on one bodypart, actually. So even if you have a bunch of 0 encumbrance shirts on, you’ll still begin to get encumbered eventually.

I don’t have any solid evidence that it’s true though - it could just be a bug, like you said.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![KA101](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/278dde/32.png) [@KA101](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/KA101)\
**Post date:** [August 11, 2013, 1:02am UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/5 "2013-08-11T01:02:11Z")

</div>

[quote=“Nighthawk, post:4, topic:2638”]I think you can get extra encumbrance levels by wearing too much on one bodypart, actually. So even if you have a bunch of 0 encumbrance shirts on, you’ll still begin to get encumbered eventually.

I don’t have any solid evidence that it’s true though - it could just be a bug, like you said.[/quote]

That’s been the case for a while now. Capping final encumbrance at 0 was new.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![i2amroy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.cataclysmdda.org/i2amroy/32/909_2.png) [@i2amroy](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/i2amroy)\
**Post date:** [August 12, 2013, 4:16am UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/6 "2013-08-12T04:16:22Z")

</div>

The way that encumbrance currently works in the experimental build is this:  
Encumbrance of items + layering encumbrance (caused by wearing many items)  
If an item is fitted then if it previously had \>0 encumbrance it becomes 0 but still counts for layering. If it was already a 0 encumbrance before being fitted then it counts as a 0 and doesn’t count for layering.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zireael](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.cataclysmdda.org/zireael/32/956_2.png) [@Zireael](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/Zireael)\
**Post date:** [August 12, 2013, 8:32am UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/7 "2013-08-12T08:32:37Z")

</div>

[quote=“i2amroy, post:6, topic:2638”]The way that encumbrance currently works in the experimental build is this:  
Encumbrance of items + layering encumbrance (caused by wearing many items)  
If an item is fitted then if it previously had \>0 encumbrance it becomes 0 but still counts for layering. If it was already a 0 encumbrance before being fitted then it counts as a 0 and doesn’t count for layering.[/quote]

That’s great news!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pingpong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4bbf92/32.png) [@pingpong](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/u/pingpong)\
**Post date:** [August 13, 2013, 3:48pm UTC](https://discourse.cataclysmdda.org/t/encumbrance-display-bug-experimental-build/2638/8 "2013-08-13T15:48:58Z")

</div>

I don’t think it’s been mentioned yet:

Fitted iron or plate armor or whatever says 0 but acts as something else, 3 or 4 or something maybe.