arwink said:
Er, I was less disturbed before you explained your preference. If AC in 3e is a difficulty level you have to reach, what's so hard about assigning a number for whatever the PC's are trying to do?
Not trying to knock your preference, just curious about the logic.
LOL
Fair enough, let's see if I can explain my logic.
Remember, I'm not trying to convert anyone, just trying to explain my preference within the context of my game
1: Knowing the actual number required on a d20 is crucial for many of my house rules--and this takes just as much math either way...
THACO15 v AC4 -> 11+ (i.e. 15-4)
+5BAB v AC16 -> 11+ (i.e. 16-5)
2: I don't allow the required To Hit number on a d20 to be voluntarily raised above 20, and this is much easier to figure on the fly using THACO.
3: For example, I allow +1 damage per -1 penalty To Hit. If I know the number needed on the d20 is 11+, I can voluntarily choose to raise this anywhere from 0 to 9 points, for a like amount of bonus damage--and the new To Hit number becomes this new value as well. Using BAB, I don't know what the maximum allowable amount of this raise is without doing an additional calculation--which sort of defeats the whole point of using it in the first place.
BTW, THACO becomes even more crucial for another rule I am considerring adding...
Multiplying THACO by the number of attacks a charater wishes to make in a round (although multiplying ACs might work if using BAB, but I haven't tried to figure it out).
For example, a Fighter with THACO7 is fighting several unarmoured foes, and decides to make 3 attacks this round. His effective THACO is now treated as being 21, and he will have to roll 12+ on an attack in order to hit (remember, no armour=AC9 in Basic
).
So see, there IS a method to my madness
