Do you prefer D20 or To Hit and Save Tables

[Aus_Snow]

d20, thanks. Tables and all that - been there, done that. Not going back.

 

[Ranger REG]

I prefer games taht use tables (like 1E). I think it both leaves the players in the dark and thus captures a since of mystery. It also seems to put the power with the GM (who determines who hits or misses by consulting the chart) and reduces the work for the players (who in D20 have the task of keeping up with all the pluses).

Heh.

I remember when TSR started making 2e, and my earlier group at the time didn't want to transition over from 1e. Before I bought my first PC, I made 2e-compatible combat table with a typewriter.

Sometimes I miss it, sometimes I don't. All in all, I don't think D&D should have them.

In Rolemaster, HOWEVER, they're essential.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

D20. I don't buy into the "mystery" argument. If they players don't know the AC, they don't know how hard it is to hit anyway until several blows have been exchanged with the enemy.

Otherwise, less lookups and pageflipping is good.

That's pretty much my opinion there. There are enough things to look up in combat as it is. The DM doesn't need any more.

Olaf the Stout

 

[WayneLigon]

No tables. The players shouldn't be kept in the dark.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I DMed using those 1e tables for a decade. I'd memorized them by the time all my players had scattered to the corners of the Earth. When I saw that 3e used AC as the "to hit" number, it instantly became one of my favorite things about the game. Who needs charts? Players shouldn't know the a AC of whatever they're fighting. Besides, they'll be able to guess it soon enough after a few rounds of combat - just as they did when we used charts.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Like many of the others, I agree that d20 is a huge step forward as the main resolution mechanic from the days of the tables.

That said, despite being a big 3.X fan, I will admit a special soft spot for one kind of table from the older editions--those funky d100 tables where you'd roll and something random and amusing would happen (Wild Surges, Potion Miscibility, Lasko's Magic Fountain, etc). I just love those things, and I can't really explain why.

 

[blargney the second]

d20. I also don't think tables do the sense of mystery thing.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Designing in ways to further slow down play never seemed like a good idea to me. I all but wept with joy when THACO came along and when D20 streamlined it, I about danced with joy.

I want elements of my setting to be arcane, not the game itself.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

:shudder:

ABT: anything but tables.

I'm more of a dice pool or roll under man than roll + modifiers, but given the choice of d20 or a system with tables, I'll take d20 10 times out of 10.

The tables are the one big problem I have with Super Console, for example.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

It doesn't really matter to me. The d20 way works fine; tables work fine, too. I don't find that either one is significantly faster or more advantageous.