Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8240577" data-attributes="member: 6801845">If limited range is the hill you want to die on, go ahead.&nbsp; I mean, you'll still be dead, but whatever.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />With bounded accuracy, the numbers you need to hit are slightly higher, but unlike previous edition (especially 3E) you aren't adding up that many.&nbsp; The vast majority of target numbers are between 10-20, with skills maxing out at 30.&nbsp; Having an ever so slightly smaller range is not particularly significant.As far as your other justifications like having the numbers written down ahead of time, that's something you can still do if addition is difficult for a person. I've done it for a player.You like THAC0 for some reason.&nbsp; That's fine.&nbsp; You are allowed to have a preference.&nbsp; But this insistence that it is &quot;better&quot; despite all the studies that show addition is easier for most people. The multiple bonuses we had in 3E is a red herring that has nothing to do with it, the number of bonuses was a separate issue.&nbsp; I would also say just adding everything up (even in 5E with Bless for example) is easier.It's easier for most people to roll a D20, then add all modifiers.&nbsp;&nbsp; If someone rolls a 10, has +5 because of static modifiers and a +3 from Bless:10 + 5 + 3 = 18 is much easier than 10 - (10 + 5 +3) = -8. THAC0 is just counterintuitive for most people.&nbsp; It's also an extra step.Then add in things like cover with a -2 penalty10 + 5 + 3 = 18 then subtract 2 so 16 versus 10 - (10 + 5 +3) = -8 then subtract 2 ... wait am I adding a negative to a negative so I'm really adding, maybe?&nbsp; Or do I subtract it?&nbsp; I mean, I need to reduce my chance to hit so -6 I guess.But, again, adding is simply easier for most people.&nbsp; I have no idea where &quot;all the things you've said&quot; because as far as I can tell it boils down to &quot;for me subtracting is easy, 3.x had too many modifiers and you can write the numbers down ahead of time&quot;.&nbsp; If subtracting is easier for you, great.&nbsp; It's not for most people.&nbsp; The overabundance of modifiers from 3.x are an issue no matter what system you use, and people still can and do just write down numbers ahead of time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 8240577, member: 6801845"] If limited range is the hill you want to die on, go ahead. I mean, you'll still be dead, but whatever. ;) With bounded accuracy, the numbers you need to hit are slightly higher, but unlike previous edition (especially 3E) you aren't adding up that many. The vast majority of target numbers are between 10-20, with skills maxing out at 30. Having an ever so slightly smaller range is not particularly significant. As far as your other justifications like having the numbers written down ahead of time, that's something you can still do if addition is difficult for a person. I've done it for a player. You like THAC0 for some reason. That's fine. You are allowed to have a preference. But this insistence that it is "better" despite all the studies that show addition is easier for most people. The multiple bonuses we had in 3E is a red herring that has nothing to do with it, the number of bonuses was a separate issue. I would also say just adding everything up (even in 5E with Bless for example) is easier. It's easier for most people to roll a D20, then add all modifiers. If someone rolls a 10, has +5 because of static modifiers and a +3 from Bless: 10 + 5 + 3 = 18 is much easier than 10 - (10 + 5 +3) = -8. THAC0 is just counterintuitive for most people. It's also an extra step. Then add in things like cover with a -2 penalty 10 + 5 + 3 = 18 then subtract 2 so 16 versus 10 - (10 + 5 +3) = -8 then subtract 2 ... wait am I adding a negative to a negative so I'm really adding, maybe? Or do I subtract it? I mean, I need to reduce my chance to hit so -6 I guess. But, again, adding is simply easier for most people. I have no idea where "all the things you've said" because as far as I can tell it boils down to "for me subtracting is easy, 3.x had too many modifiers and you can write the numbers down ahead of time". If subtracting is easier for you, great. It's not for most people. The overabundance of modifiers from 3.x are an issue no matter what system you use, and people still can and do just write down numbers ahead of time. [/QUOTE]

Verification