Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4866801" data-attributes="member: 22779">One thing I think would help in clearing up some of the confusion in this thread would be if people could be very explicit at the top of their posts what edition they are talking about.&nbsp; We're mishmashing so many editions that a lot of us are talking to cross purposes.&nbsp; For example, Ariosto is talking about OD&amp;D, Exploder Wizard 1e (I think) and a smattering of 2e and 3e references to boot.Comparisons across editions are difficult when a reader might not know which edition you are talking about (thus the leather armor/magic armor confusion).I would also like to thank Dragonblade for restating the discussion in a way that makes sense to me.&nbsp; I obviously disagree with JG Browning (and I would disagree with BryonD, I think, if he'd bother to actually explain his point without the vitriol) but, at least now I understand better where JG is coming from.&nbsp; I still think he's trying to have it both ways - Honestly, I'm not sure why you (JG) wouldn't just rule that minions have 2 hit points, same as you did in all other editions.But hey, to each his own.I do somewhat agree with Ariosto that AC didn't scale particularly well in earlier editions, but, I consider that a failing, not a feature.&nbsp; What it meant, at least in my experience, is that you automatically hit every single time.&nbsp; If baddies (other than unique ones) top out at around AC 0, then by the time a fighter type hits about 5th level, he never misses.&nbsp; THAC0 of 16, +2 for strength (not unreasonable IME), +1 weapon means you hit pretty much every monster in the book at least 50% and most are much, much easier to hit.&nbsp; Never mind if you add in things like weapon specialization (either 1e UA or 2e core).By the time you hit name level, where you are meeting those big monsters, you never miss at all.What's the point of having AC at all if you never miss?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4866801, member: 22779"] One thing I think would help in clearing up some of the confusion in this thread would be if people could be very explicit at the top of their posts what edition they are talking about. We're mishmashing so many editions that a lot of us are talking to cross purposes. For example, Ariosto is talking about OD&D, Exploder Wizard 1e (I think) and a smattering of 2e and 3e references to boot. Comparisons across editions are difficult when a reader might not know which edition you are talking about (thus the leather armor/magic armor confusion). I would also like to thank Dragonblade for restating the discussion in a way that makes sense to me. I obviously disagree with JG Browning (and I would disagree with BryonD, I think, if he'd bother to actually explain his point without the vitriol) but, at least now I understand better where JG is coming from. I still think he's trying to have it both ways - Honestly, I'm not sure why you (JG) wouldn't just rule that minions have 2 hit points, same as you did in all other editions. But hey, to each his own. I do somewhat agree with Ariosto that AC didn't scale particularly well in earlier editions, but, I consider that a failing, not a feature. What it meant, at least in my experience, is that you automatically hit every single time. If baddies (other than unique ones) top out at around AC 0, then by the time a fighter type hits about 5th level, he never misses. THAC0 of 16, +2 for strength (not unreasonable IME), +1 weapon means you hit pretty much every monster in the book at least 50% and most are much, much easier to hit. Never mind if you add in things like weapon specialization (either 1e UA or 2e core). By the time you hit name level, where you are meeting those big monsters, you never miss at all. What's the point of having AC at all if you never miss? [/QUOTE]

Verification