Adventurer Conqueror King as a preview of D&D Next?

[ThunhusDM]

Check out another review:
Review: Adventurer–Conqueror-King Halfway Station

Thunhus

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

No one who does not puke from sheer pre-game excitement deserves to be using Vancian spellcasting. That said, ACKS spellcasting is more like a sorcerer in 3.X, where you flexibly cast as needed from a small list of available spells.

Thanks for the review, Thunhus! Great to see how international gamers are. Did we play together in any of Raggi's games at Ropecon in '09?

We've just launched a new Kickstarter for the Player's Companion to Adventurer Conqueror King. I'd appreciate suggestions on where I should start a new thread about it!

 

[dagger]

How well do you think the domain/mass combat rule would translate to a 1e game?

 

[Piratecat]

We've just launched a new Kickstarter for the Player's Companion to Adventurer Conqueror King. I'd appreciate suggestions on where I should start a new thread about it!

General Discussion or Legacy D&D, whichever you prefer.

 

[Nellisir]

Tav - I'm reading through ACKS, and I have to ask... what on Earth possessed you to essentially recreate THAC0??? (that's right, folks...the ACKS attack system features the number "To Hit Armor Class 0") Esp. when (since you've reversed AC), you're so close to the straight-up 3e "to-hit" model anyways? Your system seems to introduced added, and unnecessary, complexity in the form of level-variable TNs (Target Numbers), and I don't understand how this is a benefit.

Here's a sample question: what number does a fighter need to meet or beat (throw + modifiers) to hit a monster with an AC of 7?

In comparison, in 3e, what number does a fighter need to meet or beat (roll + modifiers) to hit a monster with an AC of 17?

Now, this is not an insurmountable obstacle for me. There are a lot of things I like about ACKS. I'm even mildly OK with the race as class thing. I'm no where near done with the reading. But THAC0? Really? Sheesh.

Things I like in ACKS so far:
- variety of classes; encouraging campaign customization
- excellent appearance/presentation
- classes limited to 14 levels (or lower)
- vancian magic & spell repetoire
- good endgame development

 

[KJSEvans]

I'm curious about the game (and I almost always try to support as many Indy publishers as I can) and will certainly give it a look, but I think that HackMaster already does this. And from what I've read of the PHB and Hacklopedia of Beasts, I can't imagine another game doing it better than HackMaster. It's such a ridiculously well-done game.

 

[dagger]

I am ok with Thaco since I play 1e and use the 2e Thaco chart anyway. For us Thaco is just as fast as the 3e way of doing things but we don't give out ACs. We just roll and tell them DM what we hit. Its fast.

 

[howandwhy99]

You know, there are benefits and drawbacks to almost every method. For example, To Hit matrices can be memorized like the multiplication table. You don't have to memorize it, but having the option to do so makes running and preparing for a game that much faster. When every roll requires one to ask for or hunt for a different target number and/or modifier it slows down the game.

 

[Nellisir]

I am ok with Thaco since I play 1e and use the 2e Thaco chart anyway. For us Thaco is just as fast as the 3e way of doing things but we don't give out ACs. We just roll and tell them DM what we hit. Its fast.

ACKS doesn't use THAC0 the same way 2e does, so you'd have to convert or learn the new system. An unarmored character in ACKS has an AC of 0, and the character classes are given a Target Number to hit that AC of 0 (TNAC0?). The target number varies by class and level. AC ascends, as per 3e, so an AC of 7 is plate mail (or plate and shield, I forget). You can convert it into a 3e to hit system by adding 10 to all the ACs, and changing the target number into a bonus.

Different people have different preferences. I'm aware of that. I am terrible with numbers; it took me three years to remember my zip code after I moved. Memorizing a table is right out, as is some equation that intersects class, level, and AC.

(And for what it's worth, I used THAC0 all through 2e. I'm intimately familiar with it. I was also deliriously happy to switch to ascending AC and To-Hit rolls, courtesy of Unearthed Arcania.)

The ACKS system does, in fact, require a different target number almost every roll, since different characters will have different target numbers to hit the same creature, particularly at higher levels.

I believe, personally, that the fundamental question to be answered in D&D combat is "do I hit?", and the 3e to-hit system provides the simplest answer: AC = target number. In ACKS, AC does NOT equal target number; you also need to know the attackers target number (or class and level), so my question to Tav is purposely a trick one, and cannot be answered (unless I'm severely misunderstanding the ACKS attack system, which is possible.)

 

[Nellisir]

I do like ACKS, btw. It's very close to my own thoughts in many cases, and where it's not, it's easily customizable.