D&D General Thaco the angry clown... really?

[Bill Zebub]

I would play him as bad at simple math, especially subtracting negatives.

He has a special ability where attackers get +/- modifiers to their attack rolls, depending on what kind of weapon they are using. His stat bloc includes the full table.

 

[Azzy]

I mean at the end of the day its a joke about ageism (lol those old gamers and their gatekeeping in D&D), which I suppose is on the low end of "groups not to make fun of".

That's an interesting take away. I thought it was a pisstake about an old mechanic that most old grogs complained about and that rarely even makes it into OSR games. I guess if you particulary loved THAC0, you could see it as a persomal attack, but I'm up for ridiculing THAC0 whenever I get the chance—precisely because I grew up with it.

 

[iserith]

I mean at the end of the day its a joke about ageism (lol those old gamers and their gatekeeping in D&D), which I suppose is on the low end of "groups not to make fun of".

Seems to be rare these days, but I think the mantra of seeking not to offend or be offended is a good way to live.

One can choose to take offense at this or have a good laugh and move on.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Yes, because people usually calculate their attack bonus on the fly...

Well, snark aside....

When it went to ascending in 3e, you really couldn't do that. Each attack had a different attack bonus. There were a lot more factors that gave you bonuses or penalties to your attack roll that differed from round to round.

so yeah, while ascending is more intuitive, in practice when comparing 2e to 3e, it has more steps than THAC0 to calculate the final result.

 

[Bolares]

Well, snark aside....

When it went to ascending in 3e, you really couldn't do that. Each attack had a different attack bonus. There were a lot more factors that gave you bonuses or penalties to your attack roll that differed from round to round.

so yeah, while ascending is more intuitive, in practice when comparing 2e to 3e, it has more steps than THAC0 to calculate the final result.

I used to have one entry for each kind of attack I could make, with the bonuses and penalties already calculated. Only thing I had to do is add a +2 here and there for flanking or something like that.

 

[Retreater]

I tend to not like humor in my fantasy/sci-fi (but I do love comedy in my horror). So "yes" to Ghostbusters, but "no" to Terry Pratchett or Douglas Adams. This might be a reason I don't like fey as a theme in general - too goofy.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I used to have one entry for each kind of attack I could make, with the bonuses and penalties already calculated. Only thing I had to do is add a +2 here and there for flanking or something like that.

Even then, you're still doing at least one step. At the very least, you're adding your appropriate modifiers to your roll. Compared to the THAC0 chart for your weapon, you don't do any math. "Rolled a 12 with my sword, that's AC 6 or better".

Now, I know ascending is more intuitive. And it's pretty easy to add a modifier, but it's also pretty easy to subtract too. Either way, it's not a question of difficulty, but a question of how many steps are taken to find out what you hit. I don't have anything against ascending, and use it myself even in my OSR clone because that's what most people want. And I'm not offended by the THAC0 clown. I'm just pointing out how THAC0 isn't really all that bad, because you don't have to do any math for most of the rolls.

 

[Bolares]

"Rolled a 12 with my sword, that's AC 6 or better".

But how you knew a 12 would hit AC 6 or better?

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I thought old grognards hated Thac0 as a 2e-era blasphemy? It's not like they named a clown Attack Matrix.

I'm old enough (and then some) to get the joke, and while it's not a kneeslapper, I got a wry chuckle out of seeing Thaco the Clown. Admittedly, I enjoy my share of bad (and dad) jokes (see above, for example).

 

[pming]

Hiya!

But how you knew a 12 would hit AC 6 or better?

Because your THAC0 would be 18, obviously. You need 18 to hit AC 0...you missed it by 6 (18 - 12), so...AC6. But Bolares meant "...or worse" (and just misstyped, I'm assuming...), because you didn't hit AC5, which is better (you would have needed a 13). Ergo, "I hit AC6 or worse".

^_^

Paul L. Ming