* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : The truth about THAC0 Started at 04-06-05 07:51 PM by weasel fierce Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=408993 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : weasel fierce Date : 04-06-05 07:51 PM Thread Title : The truth about THAC0 THAC0 is always raised as the big thing that made oD&D and AD&D totally unplayable. (for D20, the counterpart tends to be attacks of opportunity ) So lets deconstruct the math and see how it works. I'll use AD&D to refer to the pre-D20 editions (as they all works the same, hit roll wise) and 3.x to refer to the D20 editions. Finding out what you need to roll equal to, or better: 3.x: Deduct Base attack bonus from armour class. Result is number you roll equal to or better to hit. AD&D: Deduct armour class from THAC0. Result is number you roll equal to or better to hit. (Exactly the same) Finding out what armour class you hit with the number you just rolled: 3.x: Add the rolled, modified number to your base attack bonus AD&D: Deduct the rolled, modified number, from your THAC0. (the same, except one is a deduction instead of a plus) Basic to hit roll mechanism: 3.x: Roll 1D20. Add base attack bonus. Equal or better than armour class is a hit. AD&D: Roll 1D20. Add targets armour class. Equal or better than THAC0 is a hit (exactly the same) Looking up numbers on a chart ? Both versions use two single numbers to determine attack success, both of which would be written on your character sheet, and unchanging till next level (Thac0 / BAB and armour class) Then there's armour class. 3.x AC: Number shows how hard it is to hit you. Thus, a high number is good. AD&D AC: Number shows how easy it is to hit you. Thus, a low number is good. Saving throws are the other thing, but I'll leave that for another day. Mind, this isnt an edition war attempt (or I'd have posted it to the main forum l ;) ) but a basic deconstruction showing that THAC0 works almost exactly identical to the D20 system. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : TheDungeonDelver Date : 04-06-05 08:43 PM It's funny; I don't bother with THAC0 - I have a chart in front of me as the DM. The wailing and gnashing of teeth over those matrices in earlier versions of D&D never ceases to amuse me. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : Elendur Date : 04-06-05 10:13 PM I don't think anyone who actually played with THAC0 really had that hard a time with it. It just sounds funny if you never used it. In my 3e game we always giggle when someone pronounces BAB(base attack bonus) out loud like a word. Haven't figured out a way to pronounce AoO. Maybe like Werewolves of London? (aOOOO..) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : I'm Batman Date : 04-07-05 12:16 AM There's a problem with THAC0? Oh no! Run! ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : Eliza_Stormwhisper Date : 04-07-05 04:06 AM I think the reason THAC0 was switched to BAB was because people didn't like subtracting. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : Warhead Date : 04-07-05 07:01 AM I think the reason THAC0 was switched to BAB was because people didn't like subtracting. The world ends! Subtraction, what will they think of next?! Seriously though, it's one of the few things I like about 3E, making a high roll good in every circumstance. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : havard Date : 04-07-05 09:56 AM The world ends! Subtraction, what will they think of next?! Seriously though, it's one of the few things I like about 3E, making a high roll good in every circumstance. *lol* Subtraction *does* actually take longer than addition, even if it is only a matter of a fraction of a second. To me, anything that can slow down a game needs a seriously good reason to keep around. THAC0 does take some time to get used to even if the logic behind it is the same as the BAB system, as Weasel explained. The thing about whether a high roll is good in some cases and bad in others is also pretty confusing to newbies. For old-timers these things don't matter, but it makes sense that they got rid of them. But you don't have to switch all the way over to 3E for that. There are plenty of optional rules around that allow for using the d20+modfier system with the older D&D versions.... Håvard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : Warhead Date : 04-07-05 10:06 AM There are plenty of optional rules around that allow for using the d20+modfier system with the older D&D versions.... Agreed, all the way actually, even with the bit about subtraction taking longer! Yes, it's easy enough to create a BAB-style atttack role, and when we finally get round to the next intallment of our current adventure I'm going to lay that one on 'em. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : TheDungeonDelver Date : 04-07-05 11:18 AM Once again: what the hell was wrong with using a chart? I look up the number once. I tell you it's 14+. It's ALWAYS FOURTEEN OR BETTER AT THAT POINT. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : I'm Batman Date : 04-07-05 01:04 PM Subtraction *does* actually take longer than addition, even if it is only a matter of a fraction of a second. I hear that a lot. Where does that come from? Is it really true? I've always found subtraction to be both faster and easier-- [stupid metaphor to explain what I can't put into words] when you subtract, you go back into known territory, but when you add, you leap into the unknown. [/s.m.t.e.w.I.c.p.i.w.] I don't think that made any sense, but I'm sticking with my explanation. :P -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : caeruleus Date : 04-07-05 01:41 PM I hear that a lot. Where does that come from? Is it really true? I've always found subtraction to be both faster and easier-- [stupid metaphor to explain what I can't put into words] when you subtract, you go back into known territory, but when you add, you leap into the unknown. [/s.m.t.e.w.I.c.p.i.w.] I don't think that made any sense, but I'm sticking with my explanation. :P Well, it makes sense, meaning I understand your metaphor. But I can't relate to it, because that's not how I think (more specifically, not how I do math). Interesting way of describing it, though. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : Zaxon D'Mir Date : 04-07-05 01:56 PM Never had a prob with THACO or AC in AD&D. By the way, notice how AC was pretty much capped at -10 in AD&D. But, in 3e AC can go up to really silly numbers. Just a thought. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : cerebus Date : 04-07-05 02:58 PM I always just used the chart. For some reason I just didn't like THAC0. It wasn't logical, but that's how it was. I loved the charts in the 1e DMG, and stuck with them well into 2e. Mostly because I hated searching the 2e DMG for anything. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : Eliza_Stormwhisper Date : 04-07-05 09:32 PM Never had a prob with THACO or AC in AD&D. By the way, notice how AC was pretty much capped at -10 in AD&D. But, in 3e AC can go up to really silly numbers. Just a thought. A dwarf fighter in one of my campaigns has AC -12. But that's the lowest it'll ever get, probably. A breakdown of his AC: +5 plate mail (-2) +5 shield (-7) Gloves of Dexterity (-12) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : boschdevil Date : 04-07-05 10:51 PM Yes, I do remember the charts and do remember looking up required "to hit" rolls from it. However, the problem with them was: 1) Usually they slowed down the game. Trying to look something up from a matrix does take a little more time than just looking at one specific point on a character sheet. 2) Usually put the owness on the DM to look up the information. Heck, the guy is busy enough as it is. It was nice to at least throw this back on the players. 3) Eliminates possibility of misreading the charts in the middle of a gaming session. I know I've misread an attack chart by mistake, and I doubt that I've been the only person to do so through the history of 1st edition. Thus, THACO to me wasn't that bad of a thing after all. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : weasel fierce Date : 04-07-05 11:33 PM I preferred THAC0 to hte charts, though I encourage people to write down the hit numbers for each armour class, especially if they are new. That way, they have it on their sheet. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : SgtHulka Date : 04-08-05 10:08 AM Weren't the 1st Edition charts identical to ThACO? It's been a loooong time, but I thought the charts were basically just ThACO, but Gary Gygax for some reason kept the math secret. Then 2nd Edition came out and revealed the "big secret" of the math. Even if I'm wrong about that, it wouldn't take much effort to create a matrix for ThACO. Just get some graph paper and write the numbers for each AC/Class/Level combination. Now, I could also have sworn attacks of opportunity were an optional rule in the 1st Edition DMG, but I'd have to read the whole thing from cover to cover to try and find it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : TheDungeonDelver Date : 04-08-05 10:11 AM Weren't the 1st Edition charts identical to ThACO? It's been a loooong time, but I thought the charts were basically just ThACO, but Gary Gygax for some reason kept the math secret. Then 2nd Edition came out and revealed the "big secret" of the math. Even if I'm wrong about that, it wouldn't take much effort to create a matrix for ThACO. Just get some graph paper and write the numbers for each AC/Class/Level combination. Now, I could also have sworn attacks of opportunity were an optional rule in the 1st Edition DMG, but I'd have to read the whole thing from cover to cover to try and find it. THAC0 does not account for the need of recurring 20's in extreme cases, though. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : rogueattorney Date : 04-08-05 10:22 AM The thing about whether a high roll is good in some cases and bad in others is also pretty confusing to newbies. I see this alot and scratch my head. What low rolls were good? When did a low roll indicate success? The only thing I can think of were the NWP's and attribute rolls, which weren't added on until late in the developement of the game, and were a tacked on mess. I guess I just used that stuff so seldomly, that it was just never an issue. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : Stonebeard Date : 04-08-05 09:30 PM You know discussions like this baffle me. I've played D&D for over 20 years and i've never met anyone who needed more than a few minutes of explaination or an example or two to get THAC0. That is until i started reading here, makes me wonder why TSR never bundled a calculator and an electronic dice roller together. Or perhaps its just a sad statement about the quality of the education system these days. Or perhaps a conspiracy, yeah thats it, if people could add and subtract they'd be able to balance their checkbooks where would that leave the credit card companys? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : GreyLord Date : 04-08-05 10:47 PM I think that's the best explanation I've heard...they changed the wording of THAC0 so that they could use the term BAB... Which when stretched in certain ways sounds like an anatomical item...not that I'm going to say what for what some might say it sounds like to those new to the game...those newbies. Though perhaps to point it out might not be politically polite. It makes more sense now...and can see why such a name change would be apt to be appealing to a youthful male audience. I think my alignment just changed to chaotic evil for posting this however. :devil: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : WizO_Paradox Date : 04-09-05 05:50 AM It was difficult at times - not impossible- to deal with negative numbers that were listed as a positive. "You find a +2 shield" (PLUS two) "Oh, so my AC was five, but with PLUS TWO it's now seven" "No, stupid. You SUBTRACT from your AC. It's now 3." "But you said it was a PLUS. Don't you ADD positive numbers and subtract negative numbers?" "No, this is D&D. Lower AC is better. If your shield was a cursed shield -2, then you'd add it and have a 7. But as I said, it's a PLUS two shield." It was all counter-intuitive. Then throw on the confusion once someone gets a THAC0 in the negative numbers. :D I hated THAC0. Every character had the chart written on the bottom of the character sheet. Tables from 1st edition I could understand. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : dndgameupdate1 Date : 04-09-05 07:30 AM It was difficult at times - not impossible- to deal with negative numbers that were listed as a positive. "You find a +2 shield" (PLUS two) "Oh, so my AC was five, but with PLUS TWO it's now seven" "No, stupid. You SUBTRACT from your AC. It's now 3." "But you said it was a PLUS. Don't you ADD positive numbers and subtract negative numbers?" "No, this is D&D. Lower AC is better. If your shield was a cursed shield -2, then you'd add it and have a 7. But as I said, it's a PLUS two shield." It was all counter-intuitive. Then throw on the confusion once someone gets a THAC0 in the negative numbers. :D I hated THAC0. Every character had the chart written on the bottom of the character sheet. Tables from 1st edition I could understand. He's right, ya know....... But I'm still using THAC 0! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : weasel fierce Date : 04-09-05 11:36 AM Of course, its dirt easy converting to 3.x style combat, if its really needed. Just deduct THAC0 from 21 to find the BAB. Deduct AC from 20, to find the new AC -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : chatdemon Date : 04-09-05 02:45 PM It was all counter-intuitive. To a newbie, perhaps. To someone who has played with THAC0 for 25 or more years, the BAB system becomes counter-intuitive. I was about 8 when I started playing D&D, and don't recall having any real trouble picking up on the math, but to be fair, math was always one of my strong points, so I may be an exception to the norm. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Author : Varl Date : 04-09-05 05:32 PM *lol* Subtraction *does* actually take longer than addition, even if it is only a matter of a fraction of a second. To me, anything that can slow down a game needs a seriously good reason to keep around. Does this include late players? ;) THAC0 does take some time to get used to even if the logic behind it is the same as the BAB system, as Weasel explained. Not much. It's elementary math, after all. The thing about whether a high roll is good in some cases and bad in others is also pretty confusing to newbies. Yeah, I can understand that. Still, once they learn it, it shouldn't have to be taught repeatedly unless they're being corrupted by other gaming systems. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 27] Author : Varl Date : 04-09-05 05:37 PM A dwarf fighter in one of my campaigns has AC -12. But that's the lowest it'll ever get, probably. A breakdown of his AC: +5 plate mail (-2) +5 shield (-7) Gloves of Dexterity (-12) Nice! I bet he was hard to hit. You need some serious thac0 on the side of the opposition to reduce that AC to something "pingable". Heh. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 28] Author : Varl Date : 04-09-05 05:51 PM It was difficult at times - not impossible- to deal with negative numbers that were listed as a positive. It was all counter-intuitive. Then throw on the confusion once someone gets a THAC0 in the negative numbers. Yes, it is counterintuitive initially to the neophyte, but it's just a mindset, one that can be taught and retained rather easily. Algebra works similarly, (anyone remember the two negatives equal a positive formulas, i.e. -1 + -1 = +2 or similar?) but you don't see people trying to change algebra. I suspect this is where AD&D math must have originated from. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 29] Author : Mikal Date : 04-09-05 06:51 PM Once again: what the hell was wrong with using a chart? Because it takes up space that could be better used for important information, perhaps? :D -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 30] Author : Bladesinger Date : 04-09-05 09:23 PM Yes, it is counterintuitive initially to the neophyte, but it's just a mindset, one that can be taught and retained rather easily. I have to agree here. Thaco IS counterinutitive, but it's only confusing for about ten minutes, then you get used to it. Algebra works similarly, (anyone remember the two negatives equal a positive formulas, i.e. -1 + -1 = +2 or similar?) but you don't see people trying to change algebra. Actually, -1 + -1 = -2. I think you're referring to -(-1), which is +1. The MULTIPLICATION of two negative numbers produces a POSITIVE result. The ADDITION of two negative numbers is still NEGATIVE. And for people who have trouble using thaco and AC ... you just need to be able to add and subtract. That's all. It's not like you need to learn calculus or anything. And as weasel fierce showed in his post at the start of the thread, the basic game mechanics are fundmentally identical to those used in 3rd edition. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 31] Author : WizO_Paradox Date : 04-09-05 09:24 PM To a newbie, perhaps. To someone who has played with THAC0 for 25 or more years, the BAB system becomes counter-intuitive. I was about 8 when I started playing D&D, and don't recall having any real trouble picking up on the math, but to be fair, math was always one of my strong points, so I may be an exception to the norm. Heh. I've been playing about as long as you have, so I'm hardly a "newbie". (Side note: THAC0 is not 25 years old. The concept was introduced with 2nd edition, which was in 1989.) Yeah, it is tough teaching a newbie that +5 sword is a very good thing, while a +5 suit of armor is a very bad thing. That's why I said I'd write out the entire table on the bottom of my character sheet. (Even then I sort of missed the tables.) Props to you for being able to do it. In fact, that's the one reason I don't hate all rules lawyers. I'd use them to figure out that sort of thing when needed. For my games it wasn't a matter of "What do I need to roll? Let me calculate the One Number I need on the d20", it was "Okay, I rolled a 15, with my +2 sword, that's a total of 17. Do I hit?" Which is pretty much what BAB is. Roll d20, add your modifiers, compare to a target number. (Which I learned to like with Earthdawn and Shadowrun.) So, rather than trying to figure out the minimum number I need on a roll by calculating from THAC0 to the orc's 5 AC based on my character's level and so on, it's now Orc AC = 15. Roll dice, add modifiers, get result higher than 15. But here's a question for everyone... HOW do you play D&D? Do you try to figure out the minimum number you need calculating everything out first, or did you roll the dice, add any bonuses and then compare it to the monster's AC? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 32] Author : Bladesinger Date : 04-09-05 10:36 PM Yeah, it is tough teaching a newbie that +5 sword is a very good thing, while a +5 suit of armor is a very bad thing. Ummm, I'm not sure what you mean ... +5 is ALWAYS good, whether it is a sword, shield, armour or whatever else. The idea that a +2 shield or armour actually gives you -2 AC is a little confusing at first, but 2nd edition has always used a positive modifer to denote a bonus and a negative modifier to denote a penalty, regardless of whether it was referring to a weapon bonus or an AC bonus. That's one thing 2nd edition AD&D was consistent about, positive modifiers are always good and negative modifiers are always bad. But here's a question for everyone... HOW do you play D&D? Do you try to figure out the minimum number you need calculating everything out first, or did you roll the dice, add any bonuses and then compare it to the monster's AC? I've gotten into the habit of asking my players what AC they hit when they make an attack roll. So they give me the result of an attack as an AC value. This makes it easier for me as a DM since I just look at the monster's AC to determine if they hit or not. I also do the same thing with initiative, I just get the players to tell me what their total initative is including the weapon speed modifier. I've found that if I try to do all the math it slows the game down significantly, but if I get the players to calculate some of their own rolls this makes the game run much faster. Also, another point to mention is that I use the CD-ROM rules to print out character sheets, which include the thaco for each weapon the character is carrying. So they don't need to add up bonuses or anything, they just look on their character sheet to find the total thaco with that weapon. This means that they don't need to spend time adding up any of the individual modifiers which also speeds things up. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 33] Author : boschdevil Date : 04-10-05 01:28 AM Yeah, it is tough teaching a newbie that +5 sword is a very good thing, while a +5 suit of armor is a very bad thing. Actually, a +5 suit of armor is a very good thing in 1st edition AD&D. A very mediocre thing would be a suit of armor (AC 5). But here's a question for everyone... HOW do you play D&D? Do you try to figure out the minimum number you need calculating everything out first, or did you roll the dice, add any bonuses and then compare it to the monster's AC? The latter. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 34] Author : Varl Date : 04-10-05 12:20 PM I have to agree here. Thaco IS counterinutitive, but it's only confusing for about ten minutes, then you get used to it. Actually, -1 + -1 = -2. I think you're referring to -(-1), which is +1. The MULTIPLICATION of two negative numbers produces a POSITIVE result. The ADDITION of two negative numbers is still NEGATIVE. That's it! I knew it worked something like that. It has been 23 years since I ran those numbers in HS, after all. ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 35] Author : weasel fierce Date : 04-11-05 01:46 AM I personally just give the AC. The two things affecting AC is physical armour and ability to dodge and parry. All are easily discernable. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 36] Author : Feadin Date : 04-11-05 10:47 AM It was difficult at times - not impossible- to deal with negative numbers that were listed as a positive. "You find a +2 shield" (PLUS two) "Oh, so my AC was five, but with PLUS TWO it's now seven" "No, stupid. You SUBTRACT from your AC. It's now 3." "But you said it was a PLUS. Don't you ADD positive numbers and subtract negative numbers?" "No, this is D&D. Lower AC is better. If your shield was a cursed shield -2, then you'd add it and have a 7. But as I said, it's a PLUS two shield." It was all counter-intuitive. Then throw on the confusion once someone gets a THAC0 in the negative numbers. :D I hated THAC0. Every character had the chart written on the bottom of the character sheet. Tables from 1st edition I could understand. This makes me think about the conjugation of verbs in many languages; the most common verbs are the most irregular e.g. the verb "to be": Deutsch: sein,ist, war, gewesen. Latin: sum, esse, fui, futurum. English: to be;am;was; (have or had) been. Learning D&D "speak" was much the same. Seems as though one just learned it as one played and it became natural. Takes quite a bit more effort to work out just how it all really fit together in terms of game mechanics. Perhaps this is the process of becoming D&D "literate?" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:15 AM.