StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Is better than 3rd ed for the following reasons:

-Sometimes I like trying to roll low

-There are more types of polyhedrons than 20-siders

-Better boxed sets

-Ability scores should range from 0-25, and nowhere outside those boundaries

-I am a reactionary

More as I think them up.

Finally began recognizing/incorperating things created by David Hargrave.
http://www.arduin.com/

Xisiqomelir wrote:Is better than 3rd ed for the following reasons:

-Sometimes I like trying to roll low

-There are more types of polyhedrons than 20-siders

-Better boxed sets

-Ability scores should range from 0-25, and nowhere outside those boundaries

-I am a reactionary

More as I think them up.

Heretic. And yes, you're a reactionary

Xisiqomelir wrote:Is better than 3rd ed for the following reasons:

-Sometimes I like trying to roll low

-There are more types of polyhedrons than 20-siders

-Better boxed sets

-Ability scores should range from 0-25, and nowhere outside those boundaries

-I am a reactionary

More as I think them up.

Fine, I don't have any problems with your opinion. I prefer the 3rd edition rules, well, to be honest, I've only played 1st edition. And I look forward to playing 3rd.

Everyone's welcome to their opinion. Here's my thoughts.

Thac0 was the most retarded system ever, and impossible to explain.

The power creep once you pass 18 in a stat was, to put it mildly, INSANE. You go from being a healthy man to regenerating like a Troll once you go from Con 18 to Con 19.

Kits really sucked ass compared to Prestidge Classes.

Now, some things I don't like about 3rd.

Overly-generic setting info. Seriously. I love having the tools to make things up, but abandoning the well-established settings for this was stupid. Sigil! Jesus, man, Sigil and the Planes ruled in 2nd Ed!

Luckily, it's relatively easy to convert most 2nd Ed stuff into 3rd.

Xisiqomelir wrote:Is better than 3rd ed for the following reasons:

-Sometimes I like trying to roll low

-There are more types of polyhedrons than 20-siders

-Better boxed sets

-Ability scores should range from 0-25, and nowhere outside those boundaries

-I am a reactionary

More as I think them up.

What a smart young man! I love d8s. They are the most fun to roll.

Infidels.. all of you infidels..

d20 for D&D reeks.

SirNitram wrote:Thac0 was the most retarded system ever, and impossible to explain.

AD&D is about Heros, not realistic combat. That's why once you get above a certain level, you become a God to normal layman. One 1st level character is many times more powerful then 0 level characters.

This is because AD&D is about heros.

If you want dead-fast realistic combat with the elements of magic, might I recommend Shadowrun, where no matter how powerful you are, one carefully aimed Sniper round will kill you (unless you're smart like me and setup bullet-barrier bound to detect danger).

Remember, it is up to the DM to regulate and make the game fun for everyone. Don't let the rules screw up your entertainment.

TheFeniX wrote:

SirNitram wrote:Thac0 was the most retarded system ever, and impossible to explain.

AD&D is about Heros, not realistic combat. That's why once you get above a certain level, you become a God to normal layman. One 1st level character is many times more powerful then 0 level characters.

This is because AD&D is about heros.

If you want dead-fast realistic combat with the elements of magic, might I recommend Shadowrun, where no matter how powerful you are, one carefully aimed Sniper round will kill you (unless you're smart like me and setup bullet-barrier bound to detect danger).

Remember, it is up to the DM to regulate and make the game fun for everyone. Don't let the rules screw up your entertainment.

Wow... You went on a rant and COMPLETELY missed the fucking point. Why am I not surprised? Before you go on another stupid rant without knowing what you're on about, Thac0 was moronic because it was overly complicated and difficult to teach. First you determine the character's Thac0, then the opponents AC, then the difference, then.. And so on. In 3rd you simply add your attack bonus to a d20 roll, and check it against a blessedly positive AC. Easy. Not stupidly complicated. I'm sorry you're a retard who couldn't see what was being said.

(Yes, the Black Mage is grumpy right now, and does not respond well to morons. Baldur's Gate II is kicking his ass.)

I can't even coherently describe how THAC0 worked, and I used to play AD&D 2E for several years. I ditched 2E as soon as 3E became available.

2nd Ed. was utter shite. It's sucktitude is what caused me to create Blades and Barmaids.

I honestly don't see what's so difficult about the THAC0 system...

Your THAC0 = Base for your level - Bonuses (Strength, etc) + Penalties
Your AC = Base for your type of armour - Bonuses (Dex, etc) + Penalties

Roll D20. Apply any relevant extra modifiers from the situation (eg. Penetration vs. the opponents armour type) Bonuses are added to the roll, penalties subtracted.
If (Your THAC0 - This Number) is greater than or equal to the opponents armour class, you hit. Otherwise, you miss.



I'm not saying that the new system isn't easier to understand and explain, but that system doesn't seem all that complicated to me either. *Shrugs*

It unnecessarily involves subtraction and negative numbers. Not a huge impedement once you're used to the system but it can slow things down, especially if you're poor at math computation (like me...)

yeah, but I started out with it, and with the minitures etc.

Mind you in the very first versions when everyone was still on speaking terms, they used to have good artifacts like "John Henry's Hammer"...

The Yosemite Bear wrote:yeah, but I started out with it, and with the minitures etc.

Mind you in the very first versions when everyone was still on speaking terms, they used to have good artifacts like "John Henry's Hammer"...

THAC0 never made intuitive sense to me because it's simply more intuitive to roll versus a target number. Instead, with THAC0, you had to subtract your target's AC from your THAC0 to get the target number, add modifiers, diddle with some other factors, check the phase of the moon, and then roll over the number you derived from the previous several steps, which I never cared for.

To Hit Armor Calss 0 is complicated?

Huh?

UIt always made perfect sense to me, and I stillr emember how to do it,e ven though I haven't even looked in my DMG or PH in years.

Simply just subtract the targets AC from the attackers ThAC0. Add/subtract any other modifiers. If it winds up negative, and you roll a 1, you miss anyways. If it winds up over 20 and you get a 20, you hit anyways.

It always made perfect sense to me. Maybe you're all stupid

Singular Quartet wrote:To Hit Armor Calss 0 is complicated?

Huh?

UIt always made perfect sense to me, and I stillr emember how to do it,e ven though I haven't even looked in my DMG or PH in years.

Simply just subtract the targets AC from the attackers ThAC0. Add/subtract any other modifiers. If it winds up negative, and you roll a 1, you miss anyways. If it winds up over 20 and you get a 20, you hit anyways.

It always made perfect sense to me. Maybe you're all stupid

It's still overly complicated compared to:

Roll a d20. Add your attack bonus. Compare to a positive AC number. If your attack is higher, you hit. If lower, you missed.

SirNitram wrote:

Singular Quartet wrote:To Hit Armor Calss 0 is complicated?

Huh?

UIt always made perfect sense to me, and I stillr emember how to do it,e ven though I haven't even looked in my DMG or PH in years.

Simply just subtract the targets AC from the attackers ThAC0. Add/subtract any other modifiers. If it winds up negative, and you roll a 1, you miss anyways. If it winds up over 20 and you get a 20, you hit anyways.

It always made perfect sense to me. Maybe you're all stupid

It's still overly complicated compared to:

Roll a d20. Add your attack bonus. Compare to a positive AC number. If your attack is higher, you hit. If lower, you missed.

Question: Does it happen to include the two rules I mentioned in the ThAC0 ruling (on a natural 20, you hit, on a natural 1, you miss, no matter what)

*Wanders off to find L5R rules...*

SirNitram wrote::snip: pointless flames.

Pardon me, but I could calculate THAC0 with no problems at the age of 8. Exactly what is so complicated about it?

What's you THAC0 modified by hit bonuses from skills, str,and dex?

If THAC0 = 15 and target has AC=6 then 15-6=9.
1st grade math.

Your original comment wrote:Thac0 was the most retarded system ever, and impossible to explain.

You gave absolutley no information into why THAC0 "is retarded" then bitch and moan when I "miss the fucking point?"

It's also counterintuitive to do things like subtract bonuses, mmkay?

TheFeniX wrote:

SirNitram wrote::snip: pointless flames.

Pardon me, but I could calculate THAC0 with no problems at the age of 8. Exactly what is so complicated about it?

What's you THAC0 modified by hit bonuses from skills, str,and dex?

If THAC0 = 15 and target has AC=6 then 15-6=9.
1st grade math.

Whee. So, I shoot your entire ridiculous misconception apart, and you flame me. While calling what I said pointless flames. It was counterintuitive and slower than 3rd Ed's system. Of course, admitting you were wrong would be beyond you.

Your original comment wrote:Thac0 was the most retarded system ever, and impossible to explain.

You gave absolutley no information into why THAC0 "is retarded" then bitch and moan when I "miss the fucking point?"

Probably because instead of trying to ascertain a reason, you leap up on an invented one and froth at the mouth, to the amusement of everyone around you because you had no clue what was being said.

Singular Quartet wrote:

SirNitram wrote:

Singular Quartet wrote:To Hit Armor Calss 0 is complicated?

Huh?

UIt always made perfect sense to me, and I stillr emember how to do it,e ven though I haven't even looked in my DMG or PH in years.

Simply just subtract the targets AC from the attackers ThAC0. Add/subtract any other modifiers. If it winds up negative, and you roll a 1, you miss anyways. If it winds up over 20 and you get a 20, you hit anyways.

It always made perfect sense to me. Maybe you're all stupid

It's still overly complicated compared to:

Roll a d20. Add your attack bonus. Compare to a positive AC number. If your attack is higher, you hit. If lower, you missed.

Question: Does it happen to include the two rules I mentioned in the ThAC0 ruling (on a natural 20, you hit, on a natural 1, you miss, no matter what)

*Wanders off to find L5R rules...*

Yea, the old auto-hit and auto-miss rules still exist. For those heroic moments when you fire an arrow through a keyhole, into melee, and into the tiny, centimeter wide hole in armor.

While blindfolded.

TheFeniX wrote:

Iceberg wrote:It's also counterintuitive to do things like subtract bonuses, mmkay?

The system worked fine for 20+ years. What was so horrible about it? It resolved combat for a game that was more about RPing than open combat just fine.

But the new system is faster, more intuitive, easier to teach, and so on.

I've never played 3rd ed (mainly because I was getting out of PnP RPGs by the time it came out, but also) because 2nd edition worked just fine and I had all the 2nd ed. books needed to run a good campaign.

So you have no fucking clue about Thac0 in comparison to 3rd ed. Thank you. I was wondering when you'd admit you're a fucking idiot.

Also, AD&D is complicated? It took me forever to memorize almost every combat related rule in Shadowrun (not too mention the absurd amount of bonus/modifiers in Palladium). In Shadowrun, you have to account for every damn nuance there is:

Armed Combat:
Target Number: 4
Attackers skill exceeds defenders: +- difference
Attackers reach exceeds defenders: +- difference
Dual weapons: -1
Low lighting: +2
Obstacles: +1- +4
and on and on...

The combat section alone for Shadowrun is 200+ pages if you count magical combat too. Palladium spreads it out over the entirety of their source books. AD&D is nothing if not cake to work out combat.

Wow. You rebutt the claim that AD&D is complicated by showing another game that is even more complicated. That's.. Ridiculous.