D&D (2024) Do players really want balance?

[ezo]

That's another factor: for me the combat matrix or to-hit chart is never player-side information, nor should it be. Ditto for the target's AC until-unless they figure it out during the combat.

I never liked how 3e pushed BAB across to the players.

That's your perrogative of course.

Knowing the numbers on the matrix and what you need to hit what ACs doesn't actually tell the player what the AC is... does it?

For myself, I generally don't allow the players to know the AC, but by allowing them access to the matrix they can tell me what AC they hit (barring any other factors unknown to them, of course) and I can tell them whether their attack was successful or not.

The same works in 5E. They roll, get the total, and ask if that AC value is a hit.

FWIW, if someone hits the AC exactly, I then tell everyone that is the AC.

Now, in the last few sessions of 5E, I realized the best AC was 16, so I just outright told everyone: "If you hit AC 16, you will hit anything you are facing in tonight's session."

 

[ezo]

I just noticed that chart on the sheet is for the varying specific weapon to hit adjustments against different ACs, not THACO and what number the PC needs to roll to hit the AC.



Not clear here whether it is for a +1 bastard sword or if the character has a 16 strength which gives +1 to hit and damage.

Yeah, I wonder how many other people noticed that. I know a lot of groups didn't use weapon AC adjustments (or at least not on a regular basis).

Considering the box for Mag. Adj. is blank, I would assume 1st-level PC with STR 17. (FWIW, STR 16 would only be +1 to damage... and no "to hit" bonus.)

And they actually have both the "to hit" numbers and the weapon AC adjustments, which is nice for them because all the maths is done really. They just look up the number they rolled on the chart to determine AC.

Frankly, thinking about this today, I might design a new character sheet with the same thing built in for 5E.
Something like this...

 

[pemerton]

because the bonuses were so small in early editions (particularlly Basic and 1E), often you didn't have to add--you could count using the table (in the book or using the chart on the character sheet. For example, if I am a 5th-level Cleric, I can look up my to hit numbers when I level and record them on the sheet. I have a +1 weapon and +1 for bless in a battle.

View attachment 383642

I roll a 12 on the die, I can literally count two spaces to the right for my +2 bonus and know I hit AC 4.
Alternately, I can roll 12 and add +2 for a 14, and look up the 14 if doing the math is easy for me.

When THAC0 was adopted, the idea of hiding the AC of the target was basically gone from the game IME. In the above example. my cleric's THAC0 is 18. I know I have a +2, so my adjusted THAC0 is 16. The DM tells me I am attacking an AC 5 creature, and simple subtraction tells me I need to roll an 11 to hit. I do the math ONCE and I know my number for the battle.

In d20 ascending terms, THAC0 and to hit tables are replaced by another bonus, my base attack bonus. Continuing the above example, it is +2 (the difference between needing a 10 to hit AC 10 and the 8 recorded in the table). For 5E, this is the universal proficiency bonus; in 3E it was variable depending on class.

Continuing the example, my "d20 PC" would have a total +4 bonus (+1 weapon, +1 bless). The AC 5 creature in AD&D is redefined to AC 15. I roll, add my +4, and if the total is 15 or higher I hit. But now, I have to do the math every time.

I don't understand why you have to do the maths every time. You have +4 to hit; you are trying to get to 15. You can work out that you need an 11 on the die just as easily (by simple subtraction) as you can work out (by simply subtraction) that if your THACO is 16 and the AC is 5 then you need to roll an 11.

 

[ezo]

I don't understand why you have to do the maths every time. You have +4 to hit; you are trying to get to 15. You can work out that you need an 11 on the die just as easily (by simple subtraction) as you can work out (by simply subtraction) that if your THACO is 16 and the AC is 5 then you need to roll an 11.

You can, of course! But people don't do that in 5E (not generally, anyway)...

You roll and add their bonus each time. That is the d20 ascending system. You don't do subtraction! That would be heretical!!!

Roll 13, add 4, hits AC 17, hit AC 15.
Roll 6, add 4, hits AC 10, miss AC 15.
Roll 14, add 4, hits AC 18, hit AC 15.
And so on...

Now, if a player realizes, "Hey, wait a minute, I can just subtract my attack bonus from the AC, and that is the number I have to roll to hit!"

Then, yeah, you have AC 15 - 4 (attack bonus) = 11.

Roll 13, beats 11. Hit.
Roll 6, fails 11. Miss.
Roll 14, beats 11. Hit.

So, again, no you don't have to do the maths every time and can do it just once, but guess what? Apparently, people do not like subtraction so this very rarely occurs to anyone unless you point it out to them. Older players, used to subtraction from AD&D, catch on pretty quickly, however.

That is why I think this might actually be a good idea for some of my players.

You do the subtraction once to find AC 10, then just increase the number by 1 as the AC goes up by 1.

In a game I play in on Wednesday nights, a player (again) forgot to add his proficiency bonus to his attack roll at first and had to be reminded of it. After he hit, he did want to add his proficiency bonus to this damage... sigh. I have gone through this SO many times I can't even begin to count them all.