Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5013449" data-attributes="member: 4937">I played with the helmet rule and the 'weapon vs. ac factors', but still answered less than 90% for various reasons.The helmet rule was easy to ignore because since matching helmets were generally assumed to come with armor that you'd find, and helmets were generally assumed to be worn.  Saying that you did or didn't play with it really doesn't prove much because it was very easy to keep it from ever coming up.1) I house ruled some of the weapon vs. ac modifiers, particularly with axes.  Also, using this table led me to separate AC into 'AC' ('armor class') and 'AB' ('armor bonus') which was a formalization of some terms that occasionally cropped up in the text, which in turn led to splitting monsters AC into AC and AB so that the weapon vs. armor table could be easily applied.  This in turn lead to giving monsters a dexterity, which in turn led to them closing the 'initiative gap' that results from using dexterity to modify initiative.  All that, but I still never thought to invert AC so that positive was good.2) I was using 'critical hits' and 'fumbles', which was - although from Dragon - a house rule. 3) I adopted 2e dragons and bards when these became available.4) Even though I mostly adhered to the 1st edition initiative rules, including counting segments for spell casting and alternating attacks when characters had multiple attacks in a round, I rolled a d10 for initiative and applied dex modifiers.5) Under certain circumstances, in particular attacking a character with a longer weapon using a much shorter one, attack rolls could be resisted ('parried') under my house rules.  In an early version of 'AoO's, if the parry succeeded and the attack was unarmed, the attacker took a hit.  So if you attacked someone unarmed, you basically drew an AoO (worse though, if the 'AoO' hit, you lost your attack).  This, among other things, served to explain why creatures with natural attacks (small claws or bites doing 1d4 damage or less each) employed weapons which did inferior damage under the RAW (see for example the notes in U3), and why the spear was such a favored weapon generally.  Additionally, taking a non-combat action counted as an 'attack' for the purposes of drawing a 'parry', so that for example, you could attempt to 'parry' someones attempt to drink a potion. 6) I very quickly decided that most combatant humans weren't '0-level fighters' (this only applied to non-combatants as far as I was concerned) and that f1's and f2's existed in considerable numbers (otherwise, humanity ought to go extinct).  I also changed alot of the economics of hirelings so that a mere 1st or 2nd level fighter didn't necessarily command a wage hundreds of times that of a 0 level men at arms, and I also ignored any rule that said NPC's couldn't gain levels.And probably lots of other things I don't remember.</blockquote>

Verification