Do you prefer D20 or To Hit and Save Tables

[tx7321]

So you switch around from advocating a slower and more complicated system (charts and THAC0 vs. d20) ?

Huh? No, I was saying Gygax must have seen how easy it would be to not use tables (ie. A first level fighter roles a d20 and adds 1, a second level fighter roles a d20 and adds 2, a third level fighters roles a d20 and adds 3 etc.) but he put this in a table (more or less) anyways....why? I wasn't talking speed at all.

If your inexperianced, yes, 1E is much easier to start playing then 3E (wading through feats and skills, gods and God knows what else). In 1E all you really have to do is read a little, and keep track of your stuff and HPs. Its the ultimate in "playing make believe".

As for D20 and THACO, I've come to dislike both. As I see it, the player has that much more distraction and control of the game (and the DM that much less). Also, the player is asked to calculate, which drags them out of their imagination (where they should be) and back to the table (where they shouldn't be) reminding them this is a game.

Wiz: "As others have mentioned, if the DM does all the heavy lifting, it really doesn't matter what system you're using."

I have never seen a 3E DM do much (if any) heavy lifting for their players (thats between 3 groups and a dozen DMs over the years). 3E DMs (in my personal experiance) are usually too busy dealing with monster stat blocks.

As for speed: table based 1E (with even a marginally experianced DM) is usually faster (and less work all around) then D20 based 3E in resolving battles (esp. when you have large battles). For instance, It takes me a few minutes to complete a battle between 5 PCs and 30 orc in 1E, in 3E it takes me much longer (and yes, thats due largely to the slowest players and how bogged down the DM is with monsters special abilities.


Infact, one reason we stopped playing 3E because no one would DM it (it was just too much of a headache).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wiz: "Gaming by obscurity doesn't work for more than a short while. It means that there can be only one DM in any gaming group (a concept that EGG, Arneson and the game's original players themselves didn't practice or follow) and he must jealously guard that information from player knowledge."

BINGO!!!!!!! Thats AD&D1 baby. Its sacred knowledge, guard it with your life. And enjoy the "being in the dark" experiance as a player as long as you can. Once you learn your odds and chances it starts feeling more like a game and less like real life.

 

[RFisher]

OD&D(1974) didn't have autohits. nor automisses.

Sorry. When I say "classic D&D" sometimes I don't bother to add disclaimers about oD&D's uniqueness. Likewise, since my knowledge of the later editions is weaker, I'm prone to make "classic D&D" comments that may not hold true for the RC.

you *could* take the 3E formulas and convert them to tables.

I did do effectively that for C&C. Originally it was just on a lark, but then I actually used it in play. I haven't DM'd 3e since. If I ever were to, I might do it for 3e.

I'm an economist, and I game with an engineer and a math teacher, so we don't use tables for attack rolls and saving throws. It's actually faster for us to do the math in our heads than to look up the result in a table.

<shrug> I'm an engineer. Higher math comes easily to me. Arithmetic in my head has always been hard for me.

While I liked Rolemaster, back in the day it easily got the nickname "Chartmaster" due to the large preponderance of charts in that game. Some believed the charts were created merely for their own sake, to create the illusion of depth. Having to identify weapon or damage-type, then go to a specific chart, roll and then possibly consult further charts from cross-indexing (go to the super-secret "you hit a jugular" table) was fun in its way, but I don't know that I'd say that it sped play up.

There are definately qualities of that system that are seldom found--especially all together--in other combat systems. If you had a system that exactly reproduced Rolemaster's results without using the charts, it wouldn't be faster than Rolemaster with the charts. The question is whether you find what it gives you worthwhile.

My experience was that Rolemaster combat wasn't too slow. One to two table lookups per attack. You know what weapon each player is using, so you have those charts bookmarked (if not photocopied--but just everyone having their copy of Arms Law at the table is usually enough) & flip to them before the dice are rolled.

We spend considerably more time considering how to avoid (or tactically draw) AoOs & maneuver into flanking position in 3e than the RM table lookups took.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Which system is slower and more complicated? 1e is way way way faster and less complex than d20 *once you become proficient at using the tables*. No skill checks, no feats that slow down combat, etc. In fact, the speed of d20 is based upon the speed of the slowest player since every player has to do the calculations. In 1e, the speed of the game is based upon the speed of the DM.

Please note, however, that it isn't rolling the d20 that slows down 3e. 3e as is with a switch from d20 to charts would be even slower (shudder).

 

[RFisher]

I was saying Gygax must have seen how easy it would be to not use tables (ie. A first level fighter roles a d20 and adds 1, a second level fighter roles a d20 and adds 2, a third level fighters roles a d20 and adds 3 etc.) but he put this in a table (more or less) anyways....why?

Besides the "he just didn't think of it" theory...

Perhaps he felt the table communicated it better. Hobby gamers at the time were used to reading tables.

Perhaps he wanted the freedom--& wanted to give referees the freedom--to tweak the individual numbers based on actual play.

With AD&D, though, there's also the repeating 20s complication to consider. Which, while probably not important to most of us, was important enough to Gygax--or someone kibitzing at him--for it to be in the book.

 

[tx7321]

Fisher: "Besides the "he just didn't think of it" theory...

Perhaps he felt the table communicated it better. Hobby gamers at the time were used to reading tables."

So, why make a game that was supposed to be more accessable to the general public have a more complex system. Why not keep it the same complexity as OD&D for instance?

I suppose one could simply go to the Gygax thread and ask him.

My gutt feeling is that he wanted to keep the knowledge of the DM seperate from the knowledge of the player, not just in rules but in combat. The reason: to keep the game looser and more under the control of the DM. And I think he understood how important keeping the players in the dark added to "playing make believe" element of the game. Keeping the DM behind the drivers seat is def. the way to go for that.

 

[jeffh]

Not true. I said that I had abandoned D&D's system, not table-based resolution systems in general.

For example, I love TSR's Marvel Superheroes to this very day, and would gladly play a game tomorrow. But I have no interest in referencing the combat matrices in my old DMG for any reason.

Just to make it clear(er) what I was responding to, you said, in exactly so many words, that you preferred d20 to anything with a table. My basic point was that there was no need to go that far. It seems from this comment that you agree, but that wasn't what I got out of the tone of the previous comment; the tone of it suggested you were in fact opposed to all table-based systems. I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

 

[jeffh]

My gutt feeling is that he wanted to keep the knowledge of the DM seperate from the knowledge of the player, not just in rules but in combat. The reason: to keep the game looser and more under the control of the DM. And I think he understood how important keeping the players in the dark added to "playing make believe" element of the game. Keeping the DM behind the drivers seat is def. the way to go for that.

I (and several others) said it back on the first page, and I'll say it again:

Using tables and keeping the mechanics out of players' hands are two totally seperate things. You can have either one without the other, quite easily. No good reason has been given yet why either one would so much as slighly help to facilitate the other.

Prefer charts if you want. Prefer keeping the mechanics mysterious if you want. I think both are silly preferences, and gave some of my reasons back on page 1, but these are at least (at least partially) things reasonable people can disagree on. But stop talking as though they were the same thing. That is not something reasonable people can disagree on, it's just false.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

The d20 mechanic *is* a table-based mechanic. BAB is in a table for each class. More importantly, there are tables for how ever many hundreds of classes there are. BAB is *the same* as 1e's THAC0 tables, the math is just worked in reverse.

The tables in d20 are all formulaically derived. BAB is either Level, .75*Level, or 5.*Level. Saves are either 2+.5*level or .333*level. So... If I don't want to, I don't have to look at the table.

Later
silver

 

[BryonD]

Which system is slower and more complicated? 1e is way way way faster and less complex than d20 *once you become proficient at using the tables*. No skill checks, no feats that slow down combat, etc. In fact, the speed of d20 is based upon the speed of the slowest player since every player has to do the calculations. In 1e, the speed of the game is based upon the speed of the DM.

First, my experience greatly contradicts this claim.

But even if it were accurate, if you are going to celebrate removal of options as a means of gaining speed in game play, then why stop there? Why not just play rock paper scissors and declare a winner that way?

 

[billd91]

The tables in d20 are all formulaically derived. BAB is either Level, .75*Level, or 5.*Level. Saves are either 2+.5*level or .333*level. So... If I don't want to, I don't have to look at the table.

Later
silver

And, to contrast with 1e, there are no portions of the 3E tables/formulae that suddenly change like the repeated 20s on the attack matrices.