Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Finding 5th edition too "safe".
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Libramarian" data-source="post: 6864757" data-attributes="member: 6688858"><p>No you want to roll high so you meet or beat your THAC0. If you do that, you know you hit for sure (assuming ACs equal or greater than zero). If you don't, you might still hit anyway depending on the monster's AC. In practice it feels more immediate than roll, add, announce and wait for confirmation every time.</p><p></p><p>Talking about this makes me want to use it again <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses B-)" data-shortname="B-)" /> I might try it in 5e with the monsters -- if the d20 result is equal or less than the attack bonus, it's a hit. If not, ask if it beats the player's AC.</p><p></p><p>(I know debating the best attack roll algorithm seems academic, but it really does make a difference considering it's the most common roll in the game.)</p><p>I feel like you're being nitpicky? It seems obvious that if you have a To-Hit-Armor-Class-0 of 1, then against an AC of 0 every roll results in a hit.</p><p></p><p>This method breaks with numbers that exceed the range of the die being used, but the system shouldn't do that anyways. It was always a mistake to introduce negative ACs. If a wider range of values were needed, they should have made unarmored AC 12 or 14 instead, and/or moved to a d30.</p><p></p><p>I honestly think that if the 5e designers were willing to replace static circumstantial mods with the roll-again advantage/disadvantage mechanic, I could have convinced them to use this method for the basic check.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Libramarian, post: 6864757, member: 6688858"] No you want to roll high so you meet or beat your THAC0. If you do that, you know you hit for sure (assuming ACs equal or greater than zero). If you don't, you might still hit anyway depending on the monster's AC. In practice it feels more immediate than roll, add, announce and wait for confirmation every time. Talking about this makes me want to use it again B-) I might try it in 5e with the monsters -- if the d20 result is equal or less than the attack bonus, it's a hit. If not, ask if it beats the player's AC. (I know debating the best attack roll algorithm seems academic, but it really does make a difference considering it's the most common roll in the game.) I feel like you're being nitpicky? It seems obvious that if you have a To-Hit-Armor-Class-0 of 1, then against an AC of 0 every roll results in a hit. This method breaks with numbers that exceed the range of the die being used, but the system shouldn't do that anyways. It was always a mistake to introduce negative ACs. If a wider range of values were needed, they should have made unarmored AC 12 or 14 instead, and/or moved to a d30. I honestly think that if the 5e designers were willing to replace static circumstantial mods with the roll-again advantage/disadvantage mechanic, I could have convinced them to use this method for the basic check. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Finding 5th edition too "safe".
Top