Well if it didn't cause cancer before..., ...it does now. Options

[darthmord]

I do have to agree on the THAC0 part. It is easier to simply determine your base attack bonus, add in all relevant modifiers, and then roll the D20 and see if it was >= target Armor Class.

Much easier. So easy my 6 year old understands it and plays rather well.

I'll look into D&D 4 and see if it's worthwhile. If not, I'll avoid it.

[Wounded Ronin]

Particle_Beam, I honestly feel THAC0 is easier. I think it's easier to determine a set value for THAC0 and then add or subtract from that. It's easier to conceptualize that way.

[Wounded Ronin]

What?

[Particle_Beam]

Wait wait wait...

You mean this:

Figuring the To-Hit Number
The first step in making an attack roll is to find the number needed to hit the target. Subtract the Armor Class of the target from the attacker's THAC0. (Remember that if the Armor Class is a negative number, you add it to the attacker's THAC0.) The character has to roll the resulting number, or higher, on 1d20 to hit the target.

Rath has reached 7th level as a fighter. His THAC0 is 14 (found on Table 53), meaning he needs to roll a 14 or better to hit a character or creature of Armor Class 0. In combat, Rath, attacking an orc wearing chainmail armor (AC 6), needs to roll an 8 (14-6=(IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) to hit the orc. An 8 or higher on 1d20 will hit the orc. If Rath hits, he rolls the appropriate dice (see Table 44) to determine how much damage he inflicts.

The example above is quite simple--in a typical AD&D game combat situation, THAC0 is modified by weapon bonuses, Strength bonuses, and the like (the next section "Modifiers to the Attack Roll," lists the specifics of these modifiers). Figure Strength and weapon modifiers, subtract the total from the base THAC0, and record this modified THAC0 with each weapon on the character sheet. Subtract the target's Armor Class from this modified THAC0 when determining the to-hit number.

Rath is still a 7th-level fighter. He has a Strength of 18/80 (which gives him a +2 bonus to his attack roll). He fights with a long sword +1. His THAC0 is 14, modified to 12 by his Strength and to 11 by his weapon. If attacking the orc from the earlier example, Rath would have to roll a 5 or higher on 1d20 in order to hit (11-6=5). Again, table 44 would tell him how much damage he inflicts with his weapon (this information should also be written on his character sheet).

The DM may also throw in situational modifiers, (for example, a bonus if the target is struck from behind, or a penalty if the target is crouching behind a boulder). If the final, modified die roll on 1d20 is equal to or greater than the number needed to hit the target, the attack succeeds. If the roll is lower than that needed, the attack fails.

is easier than this?

An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target’s Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.

My internet is broken (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Nigel]

I actually prefer THAC0 to the 3.x system. It just seems easier, but then again I'm very much numbers-oriented in every way. I like taking a number that I know for an entire level, and then modifying it slightly.

[Wounded Ronin]

Wait wait wait...

You mean this:is easier than this?

My internet is broken (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

The first quote is just less condensed than the second one with more examples. But THAC0 itself isn't tremendously complex compared to rolling the D20 versus a "target number" and adding instead of subtracting.

Mentally, like some others on here, I find it mentally easier to track a single THAC0 for a long period of time and derive my results from that. I'd rather subtract from a constant for my D&D game. It's easier to do mentally when there's a lot of combat, crunch, and mental fatigue.

[Particle_Beam]

Ehrm, you do that too in the 3.x-system. With the very major difference that one's a number you have to compare to the Target Armor Class 0 and modify it if it's less or more than 0, and the other's simply a bonus you add on a d20-roll... The system introduced in 3.X is superior and simpler in every way, as the absolute total majority of people prefer it to the old system.

Of course, some people back then, when D&D 3rd edition was introduced 8 years ago, complained about the simpler BAB-system, because without the THAC0, now everybody knew how melee combat worked and they would lose their edge over the other players.

[Wounded Ronin]

Ehrm, you do that too in the 3.x-system. With the very major difference that one's a number you have to compare to the Target Armor Class 0 and modify it if it's less or more than 0, and the other's simply a bonus you add on a d20-roll... The system introduced in 3.X is superior and simpler in every way, as the absolute total majority of people prefer it to the old system.

Of course, some people back then, when D&D 3rd edition was introduced 8 years ago, complained about the simpler BAB-system, because without the THAC0, now everybody knew how melee combat worked and they would lose their edge over the other players.

You started out saying that I must be joking if I say I prefer THAC0. I told you I wasn't joking, and I told you why.

Now your response to my clarification is suggesting that I must want people to be bad at melee combat in D&D? Because they can't even begin to understand THAC0, such that they literally don't know how melee combat works?

[Particle_Beam]

Depends. Do you think you are one of those people back then? Do you think it applies to you?

[Wounded Ronin]

Depends. Do you think you are one of those people back then? Do you think it applies to you?

Why would I for a moment think it applies to me when you're the person who first suggested it out of the blue?

[Particle_Beam]

I also remark that some people back then (and still today) accuse D&D 3rd edition to be MMORPG-like crap in the style of Everquest, the same as some people claim that D&D 4th edition is just a World of Warcraft-ripp-off. Does this apply to you too? Do you feel threatened if I add that some people disliked the BAB-mechanism because it eliminated the cumbersome and inferior THAC0 rules? If yes, sucks to be you, if not, why does it bother you?
After all, this was one of the real criticism against the Base Attack Bonus-rule that superseded the nowadays obsolete THAC0-combat mechanism. Very nerdy and ridicoulus arguments against D&D 3rd edition, as are many things that are thrown against D&D 4th edition today. And for sure, D&D 5th edition in 8-10 years will also suffer nerd-rage, when compared to D&D 4th edition.

The funny thing is, BAB (which is THAC0 with opposite numbers from table 51 for different classes) has been replaced with a generic half-a-level bonus that all classes now share (and which is also used for skill roles), because the game designers found out that a 1-to-1 progression made the D20-dice roll obsolete. Now, everybody has the 3rd edition Wizard-BAB progression (or, if you're pre-3rd edition gamer, that of the thief).

Ha ha ha. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

[Wounded Ronin]

You're asking about me raging and feeling threatened?

You're the one who is busting out all these long posts about nerd rage and the psychology of THAC0-liking. All in response to my making the simple statement that I prefer THAC0. If somebody here has got a psychological hangup I don't think that person is myself.

[Particle_Beam]

You think those are long posts? Hehehe... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

Sure.

But if you don't feel like you're one of those to whom my remark applies to, don't bother to reply to it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif)

[Aaron]

THAC0 was there because D&D used to use to-hit tables. The result of the table was to give the number you needed to roll. THAC0 is an intermediate step between AD&D (1st Ed.) and 3rd Ed. D&D when one does some algebra on the system.