Why THAC0 Rocks

[Raven Crowking]

I don't know that these naturally follow from one another, even in human cognition.

I'm talking about the mathematical procedures of THAC0 vs. Attack Bonuses, and which is simpler. That's pretty much it - the original argument was that THAC0 is quicker and easier, and my posts are written with the OP in mind.

Of course, it should be noted that the argument that "subtraction is harder (or not easier) than addition" suffers from the problem that "I don't know that these naturally follow from one another, even in human cognition", although I would argue that both, in fact, do.

In terms of at-the-table mechanics, I don't think THAC0 is difficult, but I agree that BAB is easier. Likewise, provided that the designers supply the tools to do so determining balance from BAB need not be difficult, though I would argue that THAC0 is easier.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

(IMHO, of course, positive AC has won out, hence its use in RCFG, so I don't think we disagree overall.)


RC

 

[justanobody]

Um, how about we chill out just a bit.

At the moment, you are arguing rather strongly about something that is not different between the THACO and BAB formulations. They are mathematically equivalent - so the only issue is where the modifiers enter, not whether or not they are present at all.

I would prefer the tone start leaning away from trying to "win" the argument here.

Chill out on what, and what tone?

I restated the proof required to quantitatively show what part the modifiers play in all the to-hit systems in order for Obryn to prove that they are not connected and do not add extra layers of complexity to the BAB system.

There is no tone to it. When the equations are presented as asked for, it will be clear on two things:

1- The modifiers and number thereof within a given system ads extra layers of complexity to the to-hit system

2- The BAB system has such a vast amount of possible modifiers that it becomes intrinsically a more complex system than THAC0

Which would prove Obryn in correct in saying the modifiers are separate, and they don't play that large a role in the complexity of the systems. Unless by providing those detailed equations he can prove myself wrong in that the number of possible modifiers from various things are in no way connected to the to-hit systems, and even still they do not add additional complexity to the systems.


All Obryn was asked for was proof that his/her assertion was correct with qualitative evidence.

The number of modifiers is another completely separate issue. It has absolutely nothing to do with THAC0 vs. Attack Bonus.

I disagree and require proof of that assertion. Without access to 3rd edition books I cannot prove that assertion wrong, but the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim that it is so, such as Obryn did. Therefore I still await the proof of said claim.

Anyone feel free to somehow show that a "number of modifiers is a separate issue", or that it has "nothing to do with THAC0 vs Attack Bonus."

Math has no feelings, no emotions, no tone. This is what I have been saying from the start. If someone wants to read emotions or tone into anything I have written so far, then they are looking for something that is simply not there to begin with.

My previous claims still stands undisputed with proof. THAC0 is efficient and simple.

 

[Mercutio01]

No, your claim was more efficient and simpler than BAB, which has not been proven.

 

[Bullgrit]

As someone who has a 2nd grader currently dealing with subtraction, I offer this anecdote about teaching the concept:

Total Bullgrit

It ain't as immediately easy as you think.

Bullgrit

 

[justanobody]

No, your claim was more efficient and simpler than BAB, which has not been proven.

No and i did not even use simple like i said above but the original claim was:

THAC0 works efficiently and easily.

That is all there is to it.

I said nothing about BAB there.

 

[Obryn]

BAB + dice roll + modifiers = AC able to hit.

You failed to identify EACH possible modifier as was asked for. Would you like to try again? You just lumped it as "modifiers". What are they for, when can you get them, when do you use them, etc?

(3) Apply all modifiers, such as Strength, magic weapons, etc.

That does not provide the equation with EACH possible modifier. You provided an incomplete equation.

BAB as a variable means Base Attack Bonus. That s a number you can plug in.

Dice Roll as a variable means another number you can just plug in to the equation from reading the dice.

Modifiers is ?????

What are you plugging in there? is it positive or negative? Where do i find this ONE number called modifiers?

Provide each equation with EACH possible modifier to derive a to-hit number for each system.

I expect to see 4 equations total. Each one should contain places for ALL possibile modifiers and including them.

+ weapon bonus
+ weapon penalty
+ strength bonus

for EACH possible modifier in the system for tHAT equation.

Could you maybe clarify how you see this as different between THAC0 and BAB? I'm genuinely confused.

You've listed a THAC0 calculation which doesn't list out modifiers for ability scores, equipment, specialization, situational modifiers, etc.

So, neither did I.

Apart from the situational modifiers (and maybe the "etc."), all of these are figured out ahead of time. And this is using both attack bonuses and THAC0. It's not like anyone sits at the table and adds everything back together for every attack, right?

I simply don't see what you're arguing here.

-O

 

[Remathilis]

I am just saying 2+2 will not change to 5 just so Jethro is right. Jethro just has to accept that 2+2=4.

Everyone does not interpret number the same way either. Psychology tells you that people experience everything different from the next person. So the easiest way is the one that is common to all.

The math. Some people will prefer it presented to them one way, others the other, but it still boils down to the same math; or fear thereof.

When in doubt do like every other part of D&D. Ask someone else for help. You don't understand a spell, power, feat, NWP, then ask another player. You can't figure out THAC0 right, then ask another player. Don't get hung up on trivial crap to bog down the game. IF you don't like a game because you can't figure out some part of it that takes math you don't get, then don't play games that involve math.

I have never seen a game where a player had a problem with some part of D&D, and other players weren't ready to help. Don't try to under stand why smaller is better, it is just part of the game. Are you going to ask why fighters don't cast spells next? It also is part of the game. They weren't meant to. Learn to accept things even if you cannot fully understand them. The game is much more fun that way.

THAC0 works efficiently and easily.

That is all there is to it.

While I am not accusing you of of intellectual snobbery, this strikes me as similar to the arguments some people use to justify the "dumbing down" of every other edition of D&D:

"Gygaxian prose speaks to people who are his equals and have higher level of learning, unlike the dry, lifeless prose of 2e."
"Otis Artwork evokes the feel of classic S&S, not anime kids with buckle-n-spike armor and buster swords."
"At-will Powers? Bah! That's so MMORPG! D&D is a video game now."

 

[justanobody]

I said use mine as a starting point for that set to expound on what the modifiers are.

My equation for players to use with THAC0 will not suffice. It was just a starting poitn for you.

So in place of modifiers, what are those modifiers?

+weapon bonus
+strength bonus
+dexterity bonus
+speed penalty (?)

etc

I just didnt list them all out. You claim they are the same effect, but I think there are quiet a bit more to BAB system of to-hit than with THAC0.

Which while using only addition (except for pentalties) BAB adds a LOT more tot he equation.

As RC said there is near infinite modifiers in the BAB system. Because the system has no limit on AC and to balance this has no limit on the number of modifiers.

Within THAC0 you must fit within a specified range. Once you hit the boundary that is it. Under THAC0 you cannot have a bonus great than 10 to a die roll, and cannot have a penatly greater than 10 either. so your modifier ranges from -10 to 10.

With BAB, you can have penalties into oblivion and the sky is the limit on bonuses....how else would the system allow to hit a AC500 should someone decide to make one?

 

[justanobody]

While I am not accusing you of of intellectual snobbery, this strikes me as similar to the arguments some people use to justify the "dumbing down" of every other edition of D&D:

"Gygaxian prose speaks to people who are his equals and have higher level of learning, unlike the dry, lifeless prose of 2e."
"Otis Artwork evokes the feel of classic S&S, not anime kids with buckle-n-spike armor and buster swords."
"At-will Powers? Bah! That's so MMORPG! D&D is a video game now."

Well you can take it however you want, but if you don't like chasing and hunting a little ball around for over a mile, then you have no reason to complain, just don't play golf and find an activity that suits you better, or get someone else to do part of it for you. Everything is not made for every person to like, nor should it be. That is a part of being an adult, in knowing that you don't have to like everything, and it doesn't have to change just so you will like it.

Call it snobbery if you will, but I call it mature for someone to know that everything wasn't made FOR them specifically, and many things they will not like.

 

[Obryn]

I said use mine as a starting point for that set to expound on what the modifiers are.

My equation for players to use with THAC0 will not suffice. It was just a starting poitn for you.

So in place of modifiers, what are those modifiers?

+weapon bonus
+strength bonus
+dexterity bonus
+speed penalty (?)

etc

I just didnt list them all out. You claim they are the same effect, but I think there are quiet a bit more to BAB system of to-hit than with THAC0.

Which while using only addition (except for pentalties) BAB adds a LOT more tot he equation.

As RC said there is near infinite modifiers in the BAB system. Because the system has no limit on AC and to balance this has no limit on the number of modifiers.

Within THAC0 you must fit within a specified range. Once you hit the boundary that is it. Under THAC0 you cannot have a bonus great than 10 to a die roll, and cannot have a penatly greater than 10 either. so your modifier ranges from -10 to 10.

With BAB, you can have penalties into oblivion and the sky is the limit on bonuses....how else would the system allow to hit a AC500 should someone decide to make one?

Again, these are things external to the basic mathematical procedures.

3e has more possible modifiers to attack rolls than 1e does. This is not, however, inherent to an Attack Bonus system.

Would you agree that it's easy to convert 1e or 2e to an Attack Bonus system?

Call it snobbery if you will, but I call it mature for someone to know that everything wasn't made FOR them specifically, and many things they will not like.

...and therefore they shouldn't try to change a game to make it more palatable to them?

Seriously?

-O