OSR OSR, Ascending AC or no?

[Sacrosanct]

@Bacon Bits brought up an interesting and fair point* in another thread, and I wanted to expand on it for it's own topic. I'll be creating a poll. For obvious reasons, this poll should be answered by people who are fans of the OSR as general rule, because the responses will hold the most value. I.e., if someone couldn't care less about the OSR votes, then it doesn't help me identify what OSR fans want. So thanks for respecting that request.

so the question: How necessary is it to have descending (THAC0) in an OSR D&D product that is not a direct clone of any one edition. Rather, a version that is simply meant to capture the feel and aesthetic of early D&D.

*Bacon Bit's quote:

I don't see the point in using an OSR system unless it eliminates descending armor class by default. It's the line between an old school reprint and an old school renaissance.

 

[schneeland]

I‘m generally a fan of OSR stuff, but descending AC is probably the first thing that I‘ll happily drop (I‘m glad ascending AC is included as the one optional difference to B/X in Old-School Essentials).

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I dont think descending AC brings anything positive to the game and is not really part of the ''feel'' of OSR, IMHO.

 

[Musing Mage]

Yay! I get to be the contrarian here!

I say keep descending values and THAC0, it's a far superior system to the ascending ACs, and less work overall for DMs.

 

[DammitVictor]

Thread title and poll question mismatch.

I prefer ascending AC. They're mathematically identical, but ascending numbers are just easier for most people and I'd rather spend my time and energy at the table on things that are more important.

 

[LordEntrails]

it's a far superior system to the ascending ACs, and less work overall for DMs.

Please explain. I've always seen descending values and THAC0 as more work for players and DM, not less.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Please explain. I've always seen descending values and THAC0 as more work for players and DM, not less.

It’s because the prework is done on the THAC0 table. That is, on most AD&D character sheets, each weapon has its to hit chart listed, so when you roll your attack roll for a particular weapon, you see immediately what AC you hit. There’s no math during the actual combat segment of the game

For example, if I have a +2 bonus for strength, and a +1 bonus for magic weapon, and my base THAC0 is 17, it’s already on my sheet I have a THAC0 for that weapon of 14, and every other AC as well. So if I roll a 10, it’s right there on my sheet I hit AC 4. No need to add 2 then 1 to my die roll.

 

[Azzy]

I'm all for giving descending AC the proverbial yeet into the dustbin of history.

 

[LordEntrails]

It’s because the prework is done on the THAC0 table. That is, on most AD&D character sheets, each weapon has its to hit chart listed, so when you roll your attack roll for a particular weapon, you see immediately what AC you hit. There’s no math during the actual combat segment of the game

For example, if I have a +2 bonus for strength, and a +1 bonus for magic weapon, and my base THAC0 is 17, it’s already on my sheet I have a THAC0 for that weapon of 14, and every other AC as well. So if I roll a 10, it’s right there on my sheet I hit AC 4. No need to add 2 then 1 to my die roll.

See, that's not easier to me. Looking at a table versus adding a single number? I can add two two-digit numbers by the time my eyes leave the d20. Much faster than then taking that roll and looking at a row on a table.

But, if its faster for someone else that's fine too I guess. But that table can just as easily be ascending or descending. It doesn't matter if you're looking at a table. So in short, to me, never been an advantage to descending, but their can be one for ascending.

 

[Zardnaar]

Not needed at all. Maybe for an outright clone. I can use THAC0 but prefer not to.

Ascending is also easier for new players since recruiting 5E players us the easiest.

New players struggled with THAC0 ran 2E with ascending they liked it.