Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 7525415" data-attributes="member: 15700">For a full 2/3 of the life of AD&amp;D 1e, and when that module was written and played, specialization didn't exist.&nbsp; So it's fair to not use it.&nbsp; You might as well use the stat gen method in UA as well, and assume every PC will have an 18 in their top three stats since, UA is the same book when specialization became an official thing.&nbsp; But hey, I'll play your game.&nbsp; Spec still only applied to a couple PCs, and was only a +1 bonus to hit.&nbsp; Weapon Spec isn't going to make a noticeable difference in how much easier it is for 5e PCs to hit the same equivalent AC than a 1e PC would.&nbsp;&nbsp; My point still stands, your assumption by comparing how hard it was to hit ACs as being equal was wrong.&nbsp; We have a saying in the testing world: &quot;Garbage in, garbage out.&quot;&nbsp; That is, if you start with bad data or bad math, the result will always be bad.One thing I am more convinced than anything else is by your example of play is that you didn't really play it out.&nbsp; I am almost convinced you looked or heard some things about 1e, and are making incorrect assumptions.&nbsp;&nbsp; Because if you did play it out, you'd know that THAC0 didn't exist in 1e.&nbsp; It's a 2e thing.&nbsp; 1e used an attack matrix.&nbsp; The only reference to THAC0 was in the back of the DMG on the long monster list, but it was never a term used until it became a rule in 2e.Secondly, your &quot;actual play' doesn't make sense.&nbsp; Why would a purple worm go after a camel that is too big for it to swallow (8'x6' limit, camels are 6' by 10')&nbsp; Makes no sense.&nbsp; The worm would go after a target it would easily swallow.&nbsp; And just color me a bit dubious that the worm would go after the best AC target to bit, and the PC with the best saving throw vs poison, regardless of where those targets actually are in the field.&nbsp; In your example, the worm bypasses targets attacking it in melee to move over to a target that was at range?There are other issues as well, but I'm convinced you didn't actually play it like it would have been played.&nbsp; In a typical game, playing the worm like it would normally react, it would have lept up and tried to swallow a party member right off the bat, not try for an animal it can't even swallow and let the party get a free round to prepare.&nbsp; Nonsense...smh</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 7525415, member: 15700"] For a full 2/3 of the life of AD&D 1e, and when that module was written and played, specialization didn't exist. So it's fair to not use it. You might as well use the stat gen method in UA as well, and assume every PC will have an 18 in their top three stats since, UA is the same book when specialization became an official thing. But hey, I'll play your game. Spec still only applied to a couple PCs, and was only a +1 bonus to hit. Weapon Spec isn't going to make a noticeable difference in how much easier it is for 5e PCs to hit the same equivalent AC than a 1e PC would. My point still stands, your assumption by comparing how hard it was to hit ACs as being equal was wrong. We have a saying in the testing world: "Garbage in, garbage out." That is, if you start with bad data or bad math, the result will always be bad. One thing I am more convinced than anything else is by your example of play is that you didn't really play it out. I am almost convinced you looked or heard some things about 1e, and are making incorrect assumptions. Because if you did play it out, you'd know that THAC0 didn't exist in 1e. It's a 2e thing. 1e used an attack matrix. The only reference to THAC0 was in the back of the DMG on the long monster list, but it was never a term used until it became a rule in 2e. Secondly, your "actual play' doesn't make sense. Why would a purple worm go after a camel that is too big for it to swallow (8'x6' limit, camels are 6' by 10') Makes no sense. The worm would go after a target it would easily swallow. And just color me a bit dubious that the worm would go after the best AC target to bit, and the PC with the best saving throw vs poison, regardless of where those targets actually are in the field. In your example, the worm bypasses targets attacking it in melee to move over to a target that was at range? There are other issues as well, but I'm convinced you didn't actually play it like it would have been played. In a typical game, playing the worm like it would normally react, it would have lept up and tried to swallow a party member right off the bat, not try for an animal it can't even swallow and let the party get a free round to prepare. Nonsense...smh [/QUOTE]

Verification