AdlachGyfiawn

good

Do you know what the Minsk Agreements are

Fingers crossed!

The documentary Stargate already answered this question

I'm fine with that, tbh. The caveat would be they can't reasonably access those arrows in the middle of combat. Otherwise, it's just an opportunity cost.

Actually I have to give you credit here as I forgot a balance change I did make: arrows are much heavier. I always found the ~25 gram weight of an arrow in the PHB to be unrealistically low as a proper war arrow IRL weighs more like 80 grams, so in my campaign 20 arrows weigh 3 pounds instead of 1. It makes it harder to carry a fuckton on you at once.

It sounds to me like you run campaigns where you have ready access to ammunition, so sure, maybe it doesn't matter so much for your group. I run campaigns where it might be five or more long rests between shops. Running out of ammo is extremely possible, and people do consider it as an exhaustible resource.

What's the worst thing that could happen if you remove tracking of spell slots? I don't understand the emphasis you're putting on numbers. It's very reasonable to expect to run out of arrows in a campaign that includes any element of survivalism.

Players, in my experience, never want to accept an increase in difficulty—but they also get bored when things are too easy. The DM's job is to create problems to solve, not let the players do whatever they want.

Obviously if nobody in the group wants to track arrows, they shouldn't have to, but not tracking ammo because it's tedious is like not tracking spell slots or Channel Divinity for the same reason. Scarcity is a balance consideration.

Angle grinding your neck would most certainly kill you.

Good. Capitalists sure seem to hate the free market when it's China doing it, huh?