Philotomy Jurament
First Post
The way I approach it, "Armor Class" could just as easily be a letter, rather than a number that is used in a formula.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Why THAC0 Rocks
- Thread starter Thondor
- Start date
a whole bunch has been said. I guess I'll say what my experience is.
I got started in 2e, but we mail ordered the books and initially got 1e PH, and 2e DMG. Figuring out combat was interesting, but it did give me insight into the earlier edition. (We also did send the 1st PH back, after a few sessions and got the right one).
In early 1E (as I understand it, the Wilderness Survival Guide introduced THAC0), all the combat was resolved by looking up on tables. If I recall, it was the Armor table that had that data.
THAC0 math comes out the same as the table look-ups. BAB comes out the same (per same armor bonus, and to-hit bonus). It's just a different way of expressing it.
For me, THAC0 was better than those tables. Doing easy math is easier than looking it up on a table.
BAB was better than THAC0, for 2 reasons. Firstly all numbers went UP as they got BETTER. High was good, Low was bad. Much easier for new people to get.
Secondly, BAB was better than THAC0, because as a DM, I did not have to disclose extra data to the player, namely the AC, nor did I have to do the THAC0 math for the player so I wouldn't have to disclose the AC. Whereas, with BAB, the player knows all the data he needs to perform the math (BAB + die roll), he tells me what his total was. I do the comparison, and tell him if he hit.
Note: I'm not concerned with players figuring out the AC, or anything, just that the initial encounter with a new enemy, the AC should be a secret, and THAC0 gets in the way of that.
Also, I'll note, that the players I find that have trouble, are the same ones who don't precalculate their static values by each weapon.
In 2e or 3e, I ALWAYS took my base number, and applied any strength and weapon bonuses and wrote it down next to each weapon (as it might be different). I even circled it. This meant, I already had a good chunk of the math down, and the only extra data I needed at attack time was die roll and situational modifiers (which are rarer).
The "math is complicated" crowd are the same people who are addding up their BAB, the strength, their magic weapon bonus, their specialization bonus for EVERY attack roll. No matter which system you play, that's going to be moe work.
I got started in 2e, but we mail ordered the books and initially got 1e PH, and 2e DMG. Figuring out combat was interesting, but it did give me insight into the earlier edition. (We also did send the 1st PH back, after a few sessions and got the right one).
In early 1E (as I understand it, the Wilderness Survival Guide introduced THAC0), all the combat was resolved by looking up on tables. If I recall, it was the Armor table that had that data.
THAC0 math comes out the same as the table look-ups. BAB comes out the same (per same armor bonus, and to-hit bonus). It's just a different way of expressing it.
For me, THAC0 was better than those tables. Doing easy math is easier than looking it up on a table.
BAB was better than THAC0, for 2 reasons. Firstly all numbers went UP as they got BETTER. High was good, Low was bad. Much easier for new people to get.
Secondly, BAB was better than THAC0, because as a DM, I did not have to disclose extra data to the player, namely the AC, nor did I have to do the THAC0 math for the player so I wouldn't have to disclose the AC. Whereas, with BAB, the player knows all the data he needs to perform the math (BAB + die roll), he tells me what his total was. I do the comparison, and tell him if he hit.
Note: I'm not concerned with players figuring out the AC, or anything, just that the initial encounter with a new enemy, the AC should be a secret, and THAC0 gets in the way of that.
Also, I'll note, that the players I find that have trouble, are the same ones who don't precalculate their static values by each weapon.
In 2e or 3e, I ALWAYS took my base number, and applied any strength and weapon bonuses and wrote it down next to each weapon (as it might be different). I even circled it. This meant, I already had a good chunk of the math down, and the only extra data I needed at attack time was die roll and situational modifiers (which are rarer).
The "math is complicated" crowd are the same people who are addding up their BAB, the strength, their magic weapon bonus, their specialization bonus for EVERY attack roll. No matter which system you play, that's going to be moe work.
Jefe Bergenstein
Legend
I guess I really am a genius. I never found THAC0 confusing in the slightest, even as a child.
Maybe you guys just don't do subtraction enough. I'm sure you could get better with practice.
I can drive a car with the ignition in the trunk and the gas and brakes on the ceiling. It doesnt mean its a good design.
I'm still astounded people defend 1st edition's
design. Even as children we swapped to something more like 3e. When 10 year olds realize the design flaw of subtracting an armor bonus, you've failed at game mechanics.
Philotomy Jurament
First Post
Nope, not the first. I don't know if it's the first, but the 1e DMG references THAC0 in the appendix that lists all the monsters. Also, it's not THAC0, exactly, but the original D&D Monster & Treasure Assortments list an "AL" or attack level which is the monster's "base number to score a hit on an unarmed opponent (armor class 9)."
Yeah, that's my view. I didn't see THAC0 as a great innovation, and I don't see BAB as a great innovation, either. To me, the difference is like saying rolling a d20 and aiming for 11 or higher is better than rolling a d6 and aiming for 1-3. I get the point that using a d20 and aiming for high rolls makes the roll more like other types of rolls used in the game, but I just can't muster up any admiration for that. It's just not a significant change, to me (no "oh wow, this is so much better"). I just shrug: "hey man, if it works for you, it's cool."
Last edited:
Philotomy Jurament
First Post
Damn, I wish I had the intelligence of a 10 year old and could appreciate the clear superiority of BAB (and recognize 1e's f'd-up design). Perhaps if I stick around and keep reading, I'll realize how flawed my perception is and elevate my mind.I'm still astounded people defend 1st edition's
I can drive a car with the ignition in the trunk and the gas and brakes on the ceiling. It doesnt mean its a good design.
I'm still astounded people defend 1st edition's
I doubt your credentials to evaluate "good" game design, based primarily on this post.
Thondor
I run Compose Dream Games RPG Marketplace
Thanks for the moderation Umbran, I think we can all use the reminder to be more curtious and assume other posters intentions were benign.
Surprising Variety
One of the possible advantages of THAC0 (and one that this thread has let me discover) is that there is a surprising amount of ways for a group to approach it, to use it in game.
It is easy to use (or make) a chart with THAC0 so if your more comfortable with that you can. (Both a chart for the DM or for the players.)
Players don't know anything.
If you want a game were the players don't know their THAC0, or how good a particular magic item is, this is how 1e is designed. Their also less likely to bother figuring out opponents AC. Here THAC0 works well, just note the players THAC0 any of its variations due to modifiers and the DM makes the calculations or uses a chart.
Players know their THAC0 but don't know AC, and don't do math.
Player states the roll and their THAC0 (leaving rare situational modifiers to the DM, or not as the group has decided) DM calculates THAC0 - AC
Players know their THAC0 but don't know AC, and use chart.
Player rolls, checks their THAC0 table and reports what AC they hit. DM compares to AC
Players know their THAC0 but don't know AC, and do math,
Player rolls, calculates THAC0 - roll, then state the AC they hit. DM compares this to opponents AC
Players know their THAC0 and know AC.
The player can actually do the calculation any way they want, though I maintain that THAC0 - AC would be easiest (this determines how high the roll needs to be), at which point they tell the DM if they hit.
If you prefer addition
You can add roll + AC to find if your THAC0 is high enough to hit. (The DM could do that of course, I don't like that approach because then you do the calculation each round).
While any of these approaches could be used with BAB, I think the Attack Bonus system really encourages only one approach.
Both systems can lead to confusion at the Table. In my experience, because I can pick how THAC0 is used at my table, it has lead to less.
Surprising Variety
One of the possible advantages of THAC0 (and one that this thread has let me discover) is that there is a surprising amount of ways for a group to approach it, to use it in game.
It is easy to use (or make) a chart with THAC0 so if your more comfortable with that you can. (Both a chart for the DM or for the players.)
Players don't know anything.
If you want a game were the players don't know their THAC0, or how good a particular magic item is, this is how 1e is designed. Their also less likely to bother figuring out opponents AC. Here THAC0 works well, just note the players THAC0 any of its variations due to modifiers and the DM makes the calculations or uses a chart.
Players know their THAC0 but don't know AC, and don't do math.
Player states the roll and their THAC0 (leaving rare situational modifiers to the DM, or not as the group has decided) DM calculates THAC0 - AC
Players know their THAC0 but don't know AC, and use chart.
Player rolls, checks their THAC0 table and reports what AC they hit. DM compares to AC
Players know their THAC0 but don't know AC, and do math,
Player rolls, calculates THAC0 - roll, then state the AC they hit. DM compares this to opponents AC
Players know their THAC0 and know AC.
The player can actually do the calculation any way they want, though I maintain that THAC0 - AC would be easiest (this determines how high the roll needs to be), at which point they tell the DM if they hit.
If you prefer addition
You can add roll + AC to find if your THAC0 is high enough to hit. (The DM could do that of course, I don't like that approach because then you do the calculation each round).
While any of these approaches could be used with BAB, I think the Attack Bonus system really encourages only one approach.
Both systems can lead to confusion at the Table. In my experience, because I can pick how THAC0 is used at my table, it has lead to less.
