TSR Why would anyone want to play 1e?

[Moving Pictures]

An age thing, a neurodivergence thing, and a practice thing (how long have you been playing AD&D for)?

Played from 86-88, DMed for about five-six years; then stopped. Picked it up again last year.

 

[cbwjm]

I don't even think it is an addition vs subtraction thing, it's more that with addition, you roll and add modifiers and that's the AC you hit. With subtraction you roll, add modifiers, then subtract that from your thac0. Even if you have a table to look it up, that's still another step.

I do like thac0, it's what I grew up using, but I've also seen that it is also harder for newer players to figure out, whereas rolling a die and adding a number is pretty straightforward.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I don't even think it is an addition vs subtraction thing, it's more that with addition, you roll and add modifiers and that's the AC you hit. With subtraction you roll, add modifiers, then subtract that from your thac0. Even if you have a table to look it up, that's still another step.

I do like thac0, it's what I grew up using, but I've also seen that it is also harder for newer players to figure out, whereas rolling a die and adding a number is pretty straightforward.

I will agree that addition is more intuitive, and it's easier for newer players. But I'd argue that for most of the time, it's less steps with THAC0 than any other way. In AD&D, there just aren't that many modifiers that change from round to round that you deal with. I'd argue that more than 90% of attack rolls are just made with your THAC0 (with weapon bonus and ability bonus already factored in). And the only step there is looking at your weapon's THAC0 chart, as the modifiers are already factored in---no math at all, not even addition.

That is, if you are attacking with the long sword and roll a 14, you hit AC 3 or worse. The +2 bonus is already factored. You don't add or subtract anything from your roll. And most times you just remembered what your # needed was after so many attacks so you immediately knew a 14 was AC 3, no need to even look at your sheet.

Basically, THAC0 is more effort at the front end, but less effort once that's figured out.

 

[jonesymat]

I will agree that addition is more intuitive, and it's easier for newer players. But I'd argue that for most of the time, it's less steps with THAC0 than any other way. In AD&D, there just aren't that many modifiers that change from round to round that you deal with. I'd argue that more than 90% of attack rolls are just made with your THAC0 (with weapon bonus and ability bonus already factored in). And the only step there is looking at your weapon's THAC0 chart, as the modifiers are already factored in---no math at all, not even addition.

View attachment 426286

That is, if you are attacking with the long sword and roll a 14, you hit AC 3 or worse. The +2 bonus is already factored. You don't add or subtract anything from your roll. And most times you just remembered what your # needed was after so many attacks so you immediately knew a 14 was AC 3, no need to even look at your sheet.

Basically, THAC0 is more effort at the front end, but less effort once that's figured out.

This is what I do. The players just put the numbers on the sheet. There is no need of any math during play most of the time. Sometimes there is a modifier, a addition or subtraction like +2/-2, but this is true in ascendant AC too

 

[cbwjm]

I will agree that addition is more intuitive, and it's easier for newer players. But I'd argue that for most of the time, it's less steps with THAC0 than any other way. In AD&D, there just aren't that many modifiers that change from round to round that you deal with. I'd argue that more than 90% of attack rolls are just made with your THAC0 (with weapon bonus and ability bonus already factored in). And the only step there is looking at your weapon's THAC0 chart, as the modifiers are already factored in---no math at all, not even addition.

View attachment 426286

That is, if you are attacking with the long sword and roll a 14, you hit AC 3 or worse. The +2 bonus is already factored. You don't add or subtract anything from your roll. And most times you just remembered what your # needed was after so many attacks so you immediately knew a 14 was AC 3, no need to even look at your sheet.

Basically, THAC0 is more effort at the front end, but less effort once that's figured out.

I get that most of the time people already add in permanent modifiers, I definitely did, but there will often be other modifiers due to spells or circumstance (if they're remembered).

I guess since this thread is for 1e that most people back then would have played with a chart, it was before my time since I started with the becmi rules cyclopedia and even then, we quickly moved to a single thac0 number instead of charts before moving to 2e which didn't use the charts at all.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I guess since this thread is for 1e that most people back then would have played with a chart

The 1E charts were a large reason why screens were popular, so that you didn't have to keep flipping to the to-hit and saving throw matrices in the DMG. Screens would probably have existed without them, given the us-versus-the-dm style of play that was common, and people still buy screens today, but as a 1E DM, having one back then was practically essential in my mind.

 

[cbwjm]

The 1E charts were a large reason why screens were popular, so that you didn't have to keep flipping to the to-hit and saving throw matrices in the DMG. Screens would probably have existed without them, given the common us-versus-the-dm style of play that was common, and people still buy screens today, but as a 1E DM, having one back then was practically essential in my mind.

I haven't used a DM's screen in ages, and didn't even know about them until I started playing 2e and bought some box sets that came with them. Each setting had a unique DM screen which was pretty neat. I likely mostly used them for saving throws, I can't recall what else was on them.

 

[Lanefan]

This is what I do. The players just put the numbers on the sheet. There is no need of any math during play most of the time. Sometimes there is a modifier, a addition or subtraction like +2/-2, but this is true in ascendant AC too

For THAC0 to be of much use it requires the player to know the target's AC, which they often don't until the combat is nearly over anyway.

Roll the d20, add your bonuses, and leave it to me to figure out if you hit or not.

 

[Moving Pictures]

I don't even think it is an addition vs subtraction thing, it's more that with addition, you roll and add modifiers and that's the AC you hit. With subtraction you roll, add modifiers, then subtract that from your thac0. Even if you have a table to look it up, that's still another step.

Tables are even easier. I have a fourth-level Samurai. Fights as a fighter of equal level. The player rolls a 14. I look at my table

And I know that a 14 will hit an AC of 8 or better.

Roll the d20, add your bonuses, and leave it to me to figure out if you hit or not.

^^^^

This.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I will agree that addition is more intuitive, and it's easier for newer players. But I'd argue that for most of the time, it's less steps with THAC0 than any other way. In AD&D, there just aren't that many modifiers that change from round to round that you deal with.
...
Basically, THAC0 is more effort at the front end, but less effort once that's figured out.

As I mentioned earlier this isn't inherent to THAC0; it's just that when they'd tidied up and simplified the system the 3.0 designers decided that all the complexity budget they'd saved was burning a hole in their pocket and that they needed to spend it all.

For THAC0 to be of much use it requires the player to know the target's AC, which they often don't until the combat is nearly over anyway.

Roll the d20, add your bonuses, and leave it to me to figure out if you hit or not.

Which only helps slightly when a "bonus" is irritatingly negative.

Tables are even easier. I have a fourth-level Samurai. Fights as a fighter of equal level. The player rolls a 14. I look at my table

View attachment 426306

And I know that a 14 will hit an AC of 8 or better.



^^^^

This.

Ugggghhhh. I will accept for some people who aren't very good at maths this is actuallyfaster (it's a fundamentally different method not addition with an extra operation as subtraction is) but there is a limit to the speed you can get if you actively need to consult with a table. I can approve of the Rolemaster method (if you're going to use a table make it actually interesting and nuanced in ways you almost can't with dice) but that's just replacing addition with looking things up.