D&D General The Rules Cyclopedia - Unlearning Dnd Preconceptions from a 3e player

[Don Durito]

Whilst I don’t dispute an increased cognitive load for subtractive operations, I hardly think the number range here is significant enough to warrant an appreciable delay.
I’d instead be asking why my player was so distracted in my game as to really struggle with 19- 16....

Yes everyone says this but the difference between fast and slow is built entirely out of marginal gains.

 

[cbwjm]

THACO tends to add an extra step in practice.

Ascending: The player rolls the die adds their BAB and tells the GM. The GM compares the number to the monster AC and declares a hit or not.
THACO: The player first needs to ask the GM the AC of the monster to determine if they hit or not (or the GM needs to remember to tell them). Or the GM needs to have all the players THACOs written down so they can do the math themselves and then declare a hit or miss.

They don't need to ask the AC of the monster, you subtract your die roll + bonuses from your thac0 and that's the AC you hit. It might be less intuitive for a lot of people but it's not all that different from ascending attack bonus/AC.

 

[Ath-kethin]

Intellectually I understand that this is the case, but I can never really grok why. Subtracting a negative number is literally just addition. If anything it's easier than subtracting a positive number!

You're not wrong. But it's still a more complicated process than just adding positive numbers (with the occasional bit of subtraction due to a negative modifier or similar).

I played tons of 2e/TSR-era D&D mishmash in high school, and I was attending a nerd farm. That is, a residential program for 'gifted and talented' students. In order to be admitted, a student had to pass fairly rigorous math tests.

And we STILL had players who occasionally had a rough time with adding and subtracting negative numbers. It's wasn't a huge deal, and I daresay that playing D&D helped them wrap their brains around the process better, but the fact remains that adding and subtracting positive numbers is just more straightforward.

So I can do THAC0, you can do THAC0, my 7yo can do THAC0, and so can thousands and thousands of people worldwide. I still think that using all-positives makes for easier and smoother gameplay.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I'll tell you what else I love about the RC setup: the 36-level progression. Now in practice, there's not much real difference between 36 levels and 20 levels; classes gained their various abilities are the same time either way (an extra attack at 12th level our of 26 and at 7th level out of 20 are about the same proportion overall).

But the longer level progression just makes the entire process seem so much more epic and sweeping IMO. It's also true that a 36th level character in the RC =/= a 20th level character in Basic or AD&D. Though it's sometimes comical, like since the hit points stabilize at 10th level or so, it's possible to have a 36th level wizard who has like 40 HP. In the RC universe, you're never high enough level to just stop worrying about a knife in the back.

 

[teitan]

D&D has probably held on to its wargaming roots longer than is either necessary or beneficial. I think D&D would be better off if it embraced things like zoned ranges and more theater of the mind friendly positioning and tactical rules. Especially given how otherwise "narrative" and "story focused" the game has become recently.

So you mean basically how the game was played anyway and was presented in 2e?

 

[Alzrius]

But the longer level progression just makes the entire process seem so much more epic and sweeping IMO.

All the more so if you attain Immortality and play your way up through the ranks, since there are thirty-six "levels" to the Immortal progression as well.

And if you make it up to Hierarch Immortal and give up your Immortality to return to being a level 1 mortal in order to do it all again, becoming one of the Old Ones, well...talk about epic!

 

[Reynard]

So you mean basically how the game was played anyway and was presented in 2e?

I mean, maybe assuming that your experiences were universal is a bit of a stretch?

 

[Don Durito]

So you mean basically how the game was played anyway and was presented in 2e?

Not really. Distances in 2e were still in precise distances.

Fireball​

Level: 3
Components: V, S, M
Range: 10 yds. + 10 yds./level
AoE: 20-ft. radius
Save: _
Casting Time : 3
Duration: Instantaneous
A fireball is an explosive burst of flame, which detonates with a low roar and delivers damage proportional to the level of the wizard who cast it--1d6 points of damage for each level of experience of the spellcaster (up to a maximum of 10d6). The burst of the fireball creates little pressure and generally conforms to the shape of the area in which it occurs. The fireball fills an area equal to its normal spherical volume (roughly 33,000 cubic feet--thirty-three 10-foot x 10-foot x 10-foot cubes).

This is what Fireball looks like when it is reworked for zones and to remove reference to precise distances. (From the 13th Age SRD)

Fireball​

Ranged spell; Daily
Special: When you cast this spell, you can choose to cast it recklessly.
Target: 1d3 nearby enemies in a group. If you cast recklessly, you can target 1d3 additional enemies, but then your allies engaged with the target may also take damage (see below).
Attack: Intelligence + Level vs. PD
Hit: 10d10 fire damage.
Miss: Half damage.
Reckless miss: Your allies engaged with the target take one-fourth damage.
7th level spell 12d10 damage.
9th level spell 20d10 damage.

You can of course handwave the precision involved in concrete distances and many of us have done that all our lives, but it's not the same as a system deliberately designed to work in zones.

 

[transmission89]

I'll tell you what else I love about the RC setup: the 36-level progression. Now in practice, there's not much real difference between 36 levels and 20 levels; classes gained their various abilities are the same time either way (an extra attack at 12th level our of 26 and at 7th level out of 20 are about the same proportion overall).

But the longer level progression just makes the entire process seem so much more epic and sweeping IMO. It's also true that a 36th level character in the RC =/= a 20th level character in Basic or AD&D. Though it's sometimes comical, like since the hit points stabilize at 10th level or so, it's possible to have a 36th level wizard who has like 40 HP. In the RC universe, you're never high enough level to just stop worrying about a knife in the back.

Conversely, with a 36 level spread, they did thieves a dirty on the skill percentages. Stretching them out over a wider level spread compared to B/X. This meant your thief was useless at being a thief for longer!
It was a missed opportunity to give them something interesting at higher levels I feel.

 

[transmission89]

Yes everyone says this but the difference between fast and slow is built entirely out of marginal gains.

Exactly! Hunting for all the situational bonus and buffs to add on (and remembering to add them) made 3.x much slower in that regard. I’m glad we are in agreement