StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Man, what happened to this thread?

Uhh... SQL problem, anyone?

SirNitram wrote:Man, what happened to this thread?

Continue as normal. There were apparently several hiccups during the move.

SirNitram wrote: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.

Please define where you shot my whole arguement down. Was it when you called me a "fucking retard" or when you claimed the adding and subtracting is too hard? Or how about when you explode like an angry eigth year old when you make a weak arguement and someone trys to make heads or tails of it?

Your whole arguement consisted of flaming and how you think that 3rd ed. change so much for the better because now you don't have to add and subtract only add? Nice debating tactic.

And for the record, this was the original "well thought out" comment you made.

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

Nice use of evidence for your theory. You went into such great detail on the how and why it's retarded.

SirNitram wrote:Everyone's welcome to their opinion.

As long as it matches yours right?

<goes out on a limb and starts cutting it behind himself>

I prefer 1st ed to both 2nd and 3rd personaly....

My biggest problems with the THACO system (neither of which 3rd Edition changed to my knowledge so I hope I don't overly offend anyone who likes D&D) weren't so much the complication, it was 1) the way THACO improved with Hit Dice, and 2) armor make a person harder to hit instead of easier.

I can understand combat skills improving with level, but to treat hit dice for monsters the same as level for characters makes no sense. Basically, it means the bigger/slash tougher the creature, the better a fighter it is. So giant > troll > ogre > drow by definition. That's strange considering that Salvatore and other D&D authors assure us quite regularly that drow are much better fighters than big dumb ogres and trolls. The only way to avoid such an outcome is to give drow more hit points, so that a slender dark elf can survive catastrophic injury. Absolutely asinine.

As for the armor, although I like 3rd edition and the d20 system in general, this is one of those things I just can't abide. In 2nd edition it was bad enough, but in 3rd there are already items and spells that bestow damage resistance, and yet bulky, cumbersome armor still makes a person more agile rather than less and bestows no damage resistance at all when a hit is actually landed.

TheFeniX wrote:

SirNitram wrote: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.

Please define where you shot my whole arguement down. Was it when you called me a "fucking retard" or when you claimed the adding and subtracting is too hard? Or how about when you explode like an angry eigth year old when you make a weak arguement and someone trys to make heads or tails of it?

Where you claimed I was objecting to Thac0 on the basis of 'realism'. I realize you're upset you got flamed, but you did something stupid. Deal. Oh, and you might want to learn the difference about something being 'too hard'(What you claim we think Thac0 is), and something being inconvenient/unintuitive(What we're actually saying).

Your whole arguement consisted of flaming and how you think that 3rd ed. change so much for the better because now you don't have to add and subtract only add? Nice debating tactic.

Wow, I argue something is easier.. And it is. Wow. So, my argument that it's easier is invalidated.. Where? Oh yes, no where.

And for the record, this was the original "well thought out" comment you made.

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

Nice use of evidence for your theory. You went into such great detail on the how and why it's retarded.

Most people understand. I realize you're a masterful combination of stupid, stubborn, and angry, but I don't care. Of course, you could have asked what I didn't like before you leapt into your ignorant little tirade..

SirNitram wrote:Everyone's welcome to their opinion.

As long as it matches yours right?

No, as long as they don't try and be morons and/or claim I'm saying something other than I am. If you have an actual argument about the ease of either system, you could focus on that.. But then again, you've never tried the alternative, so the best you can do is compare Thac0 to something even more retardedly complicated, Shadowrun.

Again, my argument is that Thac0 is more complicated than the 3rd Edition To Hit. Do you actually have a rebuttal?

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:My biggest problems with the THACO system (neither of which 3rd Edition changed to my knowledge so I hope I don't overly offend anyone who likes D&D) weren't so much the complication, it was 1) the way THACO improved with Hit Dice, and 2) armor make a person harder to hit instead of easier.

I can understand combat skills improving with level, but to treat hit dice for monsters the same as level for characters makes no sense. Basically, it means the bigger/slash tougher the creature, the better a fighter it is. So giant > troll > ogre > drow by definition. That's strange considering that Salvatore and other D&D authors assure us quite regularly that drow are much better fighters than big dumb ogres and trolls. The only way to avoid such an outcome is to give drow more hit points, so that a slender dark elf can survive catastrophic injury. Absolutely asinine.

Actually, the method myself and others use is to give the Drow levels in classes, like mage and fighter. This solves the problem nicely.

As for the armor, although I like 3rd edition and the d20 system in general, this is one of those things I just can't abide. In 2nd edition it was bad enough, but in 3rd there are already items and spells that bestow damage resistance, and yet bulky, cumbersome armor still makes a person more agile rather than less and bestows no damage resistance at all when a hit is actually landed.

See, that'd be logical.

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:As for the armor, although I like 3rd edition and the d20 system in general, this is one of those things I just can't abide. In 2nd edition it was bad enough, but in 3rd there are already items and spells that bestow damage resistance, and yet bulky, cumbersome armor still makes a person more agile rather than less and bestows no damage resistance at all when a hit is actually landed.

Armor doesn't make it harder to land a blow - any time an attack roll exceeds your touch AC (10+dex bonus-any armor modifiers), the blow actually lands. What armor does is make it harder to land a telling blow - a hit that actually does damage.

SirNitram wrote:Where you claimed I was objecting to Thac0 on the basis of 'realism'.

Because you gave no other commentary on why it's "retarded" and "impossible to explain." Faced with lack of information, people will make desicions on their own. "Impossible to explain" to me had something to do with "impossible to explain as realistic combat." Your response to my "tirade" was to go into your own tirade and start flaming.

I realize you're upset you got flamed,

Actually, I find it funny because it's the first thing most people result too.

but you did something stupid.

And you show how much smarter you are than me by acting like a middle schooler?

Oh, and you might want to learn the difference about something being 'too hard'(What you claim we think Thac0 is), and something being inconvenient/unintuitive(What we're actually saying).

I found nothing inconvenient about the THAC0 system. It is ridiculously easy to use. I brought up Shadowrun because they strive for realism which takes many more rules in order accomplish. THAC0 is just basic + - math.

SirNitram wrote:Thac0 was moronic because it was overly complicated and difficult to teach.

Would you agree that "overly complicated" = "too hard?" Probably not but I'll ask anyways. You also claimed that THAC0 is "hard to teach." My first grade teacher taught me how to add and subtract. She's either a genius or realized that it's just not that difficult.

Wow, I argue something is easier.. And it is. Wow. So, my argument that it's easier is invalidated.. Where? Oh yes, no where.

How much easier than THACO+(bonuses-modifiers)<D20 roll does it need to be? And how does moving (-modifiers) into the positives make it so much better? Those modfiers have to go somewhere unless they just threw them away.

Most people understand. I realize you're a masterful combination of stupid, stubborn, and angry, but I don't care. Of course, you could have asked what I didn't like before you leapt into your ignorant little tirade..

Please give numbers on "most people understand." Most the RL role-players I know love THAC0 even if they like 3rd edition better. They didn't have any problem with it.

SirNitram wrote:Everyone's welcome to their opinion.

As long as it matches yours right?

No, as long as they don't try and be morons and/or claim I'm saying something other than I am. If you have an actual argument about the ease of either system, you could focus on that.. But then again, you've never tried the alternative, so the best you can do is compare Thac0 to something even more retardedly complicated, Shadowrun.

Actually, I've been saying that an eight-year-old doesn't have problems with calculating THAC0 in his head. So what's the problem with it?

Again, my argument is that Thac0 is more complicated than the 3rd Edition To Hit. Do you actually have a rebuttal?

And this claim makes 2nd edition rules "retarded and impossible to explain." Of course, the fact that my RPing buddies and I never once had a problem with it, and no one else I've spoken with has ever mouth concern that THAC0 is overly compicated still means that we should run out and buy 3rd edition right now or risk having to do subtraction.

And for the record (again), your original arguement was "THAC0 is retarded and impossible to explain." My rebuttal was that it is neither, but feel free to misdirect my arguement much like you said I did to yours.

TheFeniX wrote:

SirNitram wrote:Where you claimed I was objecting to Thac0 on the basis of 'realism'.

Because you gave no other commentary on why it's "retarded" and "impossible to explain." Faced with lack of information, people will make desicions on their own. "Impossible to explain" to me had something to do with "impossible to explain as realistic combat." Your response to my "tirade" was to go into your own tirade and start flaming.

Why yes, when you do stupid things, people tend to flame you here. Hence you got flamed.

I realize you're upset you got flamed,

Actually, I find it funny because it's the first thing most people result too.

but you did something stupid.

And you show how much smarter you are than me by acting like a middle schooler?

Oh, it's the old 'if you flame me you're a child' nonsense. wheeee.

Oh, and you might want to learn the difference about something being 'too hard'(What you claim we think Thac0 is), and something being inconvenient/unintuitive(What we're actually saying).

I found nothing inconvenient about the THAC0 system. It is ridiculously easy to use. I brought up Shadowrun because they strive for realism which takes many more rules in order accomplish. THAC0 is just basic + - math.

And the 3rd edition rules to hit are easier and more convenient. Hell, dozens of games have rules that are more intuitive, quicker to pick up, and faster to use than Thac0.

SirNitram wrote:Thac0 was moronic because it was overly complicated and difficult to teach.

Would you agree that "overly complicated" = "too hard?" Probably not but I'll ask anyways. You also claimed that THAC0 is "hard to teach." My first grade teacher taught me how to add and subtract. She's either a genius or realized that it's just not that difficult.

Or you've never been the DM introducing this stuff to non-gamers. Once you realize that an armor with a positive bonus reduces the AC, you realize why it'll trip laypeople up. Or maybe you'll just continue to snip at random.

Wow, I argue something is easier.. And it is. Wow. So, my argument that it's easier is invalidated.. Where? Oh yes, no where.

How much easier than THACO+(bonuses-modifiers)<D20 roll does it need to be? And how does moving (-modifiers) into the positives make it so much better? Those modfiers have to go somewhere unless they just threw them away.

Here you would be well served to know what you're talking about, by actually looking at the 3rd Ed rules. Again, it is simple: You just add the To Hit to the dice roll. The total is the highest AC you can hit. No chart, no strange relationship to keep track of, no trying to explain to the n00b why a positive bonus lowers your AC.

Most people understand. I realize you're a masterful combination of stupid, stubborn, and angry, but I don't care. Of course, you could have asked what I didn't like before you leapt into your ignorant little tirade..

Please give numbers on "most people understand." Most the RL role-players I know love THAC0 even if they like 3rd edition better. They didn't have any problem with it.

You challenge a largely unsupported claim with an even more unsupported one? Do you realize how ridiculous you look?

As long as it matches yours right?

No, as long as they don't try and be morons and/or claim I'm saying something other than I am. If you have an actual argument about the ease of either system, you could focus on that.. But then again, you've never tried the alternative, so the best you can do is compare Thac0 to something even more retardedly complicated, Shadowrun.

Actually, I've been saying that an eight-year-old doesn't have problems with calculating THAC0 in his head. So what's the problem with it?

I've only explain that a dozen times. Others have contributed. Wow, it can be done in the head. But other systems are easier. The fact you've never looked at the superior alternative I'm talking about is kinda telling.

Again, my argument is that Thac0 is more complicated than the 3rd Edition To Hit. Do you actually have a rebuttal?

And this claim makes 2nd edition rules "retarded and impossible to explain." Of course, the fact that my RPing buddies and I never once had a problem with it, and no one else I've spoken with has ever mouth concern that THAC0 is overly compicated still means that we should run out and buy 3rd edition right now or risk having to do subtraction.

A wonderful strawman, but still a strawman.

And for the record (again), your original arguement was "THAC0 is retarded and impossible to explain." My rebuttal was that it is neither, but feel free to misdirect my arguement much like you said I did to yours.

Whatever, retard. Your 'rebuttal' was to an argument I didn't make, and you're just trying to save face. I've explained the point, you didn't get it, prattle all you want.

Moved to gaming.

Actually remember this was all originally based off a set of Wargame rules created by Gygax, Hargrave, and others. THe idea was that it was esier to injure a footman in leather, then it was a soldier in chainmail. Of the three Chainmail direvatives AD&D and Arduin kept thaco hoverer Arduin also penalized movement and dex agjustment for wearing heavy armour (Unless it's that wieghtless elven shit), also like Gamma World, Arduin had your HD based on your Con, while you ability to hit was based on your level. Going up in level you got a mild bonus do HP, but not the uber insane ones from AD&D.

Chaosium's Fantasy engine, kept the basic 3d6 scores, and went to percentile for skills including combat. The system still exists in Call of Cthutlu, and Stormbringer.

& I have just reveled in how much of a nerd I really am.

SirNitram wrote:Why yes, when you do stupid things, people tend to flame you here. Hence you got flamed.

Yes and post like "this is retarded" are considered very informed right?

Oh, it's the old 'if you flame me you're a child' nonsense. wheeee.

No, but if you decide to line every arguement you have with it, it looses it's effect. Plus, it adds useless filler to your already pretty weak arguement that taking subtraction out of AD&D makes it so much better.

And the 3rd edition rules to hit are easier and more convenient. Hell, dozens of games have rules that are more intuitive, quicker to pick up, and faster to use than Thac0.

But what's "retarded" about THAC0? If it's easy, and works: then why is there a need to use 3rd when someone has a considerable collection of 2nd ed. books, enjoys using it, and does not find it complicated?

SirNitram wrote:Thac0 was moronic because it was overly complicated and difficult to teach.

Would you agree that "overly complicated" = "too hard?" Probably not but I'll ask anyways. You also claimed that THAC0 is "hard to teach." My first grade teacher taught me how to add and subtract. She's either a genius or realized that it's just not that difficult.

Or you've never been the DM introducing this stuff to non-gamers. Once you realize that an armor with a positive bonus reduces the AC, you realize why it'll trip laypeople up. Or maybe you'll just continue to snip at random.

Snip what? You claimed that you never said THAC0 was too hard. When I showed you a post you made, you took that back and brought up "lay people." If a "lay-person" doesn't understand 1st grade math, they have more problems than figuring out THAC0.

For the record, I've never had a problem explaining THAC0 to any of my players. The only complaint some had was "that's not very realistic."

Here you would be well served to know what you're talking about, by actually looking at the 3rd Ed rules. Again, it is simple: You just add the To Hit to the dice roll. The total is the highest AC you can hit. No chart, no strange relationship to keep track of, no trying to explain to the n00b why a positive bonus lowers your AC

I don't need too, because I'm not arguing that THAC0 > 3rd ed rules. I'm arguing that THAC0 isn't as complicated as you make it out to be.

Most people understand. I realize you're a masterful combination of stupid, stubborn, and angry, but I don't care. Of course, you could have asked what I didn't like before you leapt into your ignorant little tirade..

Please give numbers on "most people understand." Most the RL role-players I know love THAC0 even if they like 3rd edition better. They didn't have any problem with it.

You challenge a largely unsupported claim with an even more unsupported one? Do you realize how ridiculous you look?

Your claim "most people" which would mean "most role-players across the world." I'm talking about people I know, which are people I can say that don't have a problem with THAC0.

And where exactly am I "angry" like you say? I'm not the one saying "I've had a bad day" and then proceed to throw in verbal jabs everytime I get the chance.

I've only explain that a dozen times. Others have contributed. Wow, it can be done in the head. But other systems are easier. The fact you've never looked at the superior alternative I'm talking about is kinda telling.

Flipping a coin is easier, why not do that? What about paper, rock, scissor? Or you could just draw cards and whoever has the higher one wins!!

How easy does it have to be to not be "retarded" or "overly complicated?"

Again, my argument is that Thac0 is more complicated than the 3rd Edition To Hit. Do you actually have a rebuttal?

And this claim makes 2nd edition rules "retarded and impossible to explain." Of course, the fact that my RPing buddies and I never once had a problem with it, and no one else I've spoken with has ever mouth concern that THAC0 is overly compicated still means that we should run out and buy 3rd edition right now or risk having to do subtraction.

A wonderful strawman, but still a strawman.

All right, I'll skip this one because it's already been explained above that: easier is not always better.

And for the record (again), your original arguement was "THAC0 is retarded and impossible to explain." My rebuttal was that it is neither, but feel free to misdirect my arguement much like you said I did to yours.

Whatever, retard. Your 'rebuttal' was to an argument I didn't make, and you're just trying to save face. I've explained the point, you didn't get it, prattle all you want.

And you claim that I'm the angry one? Ha. You like the word "retard" don't you. Have you ever thought about mixing things up for added effect? How about "stupid retard?" Yea, that will strengthen your arguement 1000 fold.

Yes, you never said THAC0 is "retarded and overly complex." To take the flip side, what solid arguement have you made?

You started from "THAC0 is retarded and overly complex because you have to subtract, and 3rd edition is better because you don't know." Sure, it may very well be better than THAC0, but this does not make THAC0 stupid or overly complex. It makes it an old system, that still works fine for those who wish to use it.

Okay... so to sum up your arguements....

SirNitram is saying ThAC0 is retarded because it uses subtraction.

TheFeniX is saying he doesn't give a shit, because he doesn't want to go out and buy the 3rd edition books, since he (much like myself) alreayd has a whole crapload of 2nd edition books.

I would like to also put forward that I had no problem understanding ThAC0 after it was explained to me. Once it is explained properly, it all becomes clear, and most people generally say 'neat'

That, and the pronounced form of ThAC0 is always really neat.

*misses BASIC D+D*

SirNitram wrote:Actually, the method myself and others use is to give the Drow levels in classes, like mage and fighter. This solves the problem nicely.

Only by creating another one. Drizzt (for example) is always written as being an amazing fighter (probably level 18 or more) yet he is never written as being able to take superheroic amounts of abuse, or in fact any more than the average person. Why should fighting skill be tied to ability to take punishment? The two very rarely correlate in literature and in nature. They should be two completely seperate concepts.

Iceberg wrote:Armor doesn't make it harder to land a blow - any time an attack roll exceeds your touch AC (10+dex bonus-any armor modifiers), the blow actually lands. What armor does is make it harder to land a telling blow - a hit that actually does damage.

So they did change it for 3rd edition, then. That makes a little more sense, but not a lot. A suit of armor isn't going to make much difference against a giant's club, and certainly would not make a landed blow from said giant do no damage rather than dozens of points. And there's still the problem that if the blow goes through, it's like there wasn't any armor there at all for purposes of determining damage. So either our hero is laughing off giant-sized blows or being shattered by them, with no in-between. Ugh.

Yeah... I have considered granting armor certain properties agains certain types of weapons.. Full plate would give you damage reduction against a giants club....

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:Only by creating another one. Drizzt (for example) is always written as being an amazing fighter (probably level 18 or more) yet he is never written as being able to take superheroic amounts of abuse, or in fact any more than the average person. Why should fighting skill be tied to ability to take punishment? The two very rarely correlate in literature and in nature. They should be two completely seperate concepts.

Such is the problem with AD&D, the combat is extremely unrealistic. One guy told me it has to do with a higher level character taking damage better than a lower level character such as moving himself to take a sword hit in a less critical location, or rolling with an impact, other nifty moves to decrease damage.

It still doesn't explain why someone can survive falling off a cliff and slamming into the rocks at the bottom.

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Yeah... I have considered granting armor certain properties agains certain types of weapons.. Full plate would give you damage reduction against a giants club....

The 2nd ed. player's handbook has it setup that attacks against certain armor raise or lower the AC depending on type. Chain lowers it's AC against piecing weapons, but it's raised against clubbing weapons, etc.

I also don't agree with AD&D's assumption that armor prevents damage, not absorbs it. I don't know about you, but I've noticed guys wearing bullet-proff vests still getting hurt pretty bad when hit with a bullet larger than a .40 cal.

TheFeniX wrote:Such is the problem with AD&D, the combat is extremely unrealistic. One guy told me it has to do with a higher level character taking damage better than a lower level character such as moving himself to take a sword hit in a less critical location, or rolling with an impact, other nifty moves to decrease damage.

It still doesn't explain why someone can survive falling off a cliff and slamming into the rocks at the bottom.

And it fails anyway. When has any real person consistently been able to partially dodge at the last second?

I also don't agree with AD&D's assumption that armor prevents damage, not absorbs it. I don't know about you, but I've noticed guys wearing bullet-proff vests still getting hurt pretty bad when hit with a bullet larger than a .40 cal.

The realism thing certainly bugs me, but there's a game balance issue here, too. When there's no drawbacks to wearing armor, then the heavier the better. Why not wear armor made of 6" thick stone? Different viable alternatives for armor wear, each suited to different things, makes the game more interesting. Variety is the spice of life after all.

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

Bah, the only reason y'all don't like THAC0 is that you're all clearly biased against negative numbers. I blame society.

End the opression! Equal justice for negative numbers!

[size=0]note location of tongue, ie in cheek.[/size]

Well I love Negative Numbers, Positive ones, Fractions that never end, and even Irrational Numbers....

putting the i in Pi

I only serriously play with the d20 system on the PC D&D games, but quite frankly I wouldn't want anything other than a computer DMing for it. Technically, we all could run RPGs that use 3D ability charts and trigonometry to-hit rules, but why the fuck make it more complicated than it needs to be? Just give me a fistful of standard dice and a difficulty number, and I can roll any skill I can think up on the spot. :Mrgreen:

And yes, I am a D6 fan. But I should also point out that for D&D I miss the weapon speeds from 2nd Ed. Now the only point of weapons is to get the biggest one you can. My Gnomish Paladin used a bastard sword that was bigger than he was.

TheFeniX wrote: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.

That's right. In AD&D - speak, a hero is the same as a god (or demi-god, or whatever). It's retarded.

TheFeniX wrote: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).

Ah yes, Shadowrun, where a sniper with a .22 will do as much damage as a rookie with a gatling cannon.

TheFeniX wrote: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.

Then what's the point of differentiating between rules?