Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thondor" data-source="post: 4710665" data-attributes="member: 31955">Well . . . I don't think so.Something that I think hasn't been addressed so far is that by using the THAC0 system, you deal with fewer large numbers in your math. Which can be nice.Yes oK THAC0 itself can be a high number, however AC rarely goes above 7 or below -7. Lets take an example of a 14th level fighter in both systems. No magic weapons, str bonus, or other benefits for simplicity.Figther has a THAC0 of 6. The DM decides to tell the fighter that his opponent (a Pit Fiend) has a AC of -3.The player does the math 6 - -3 = 9. He rolls twice for his two attacks. Both are 9 or better! That's two hits!Fighter has a BAB of +14/+9/+4 . The DM decides to tell the player the opponent (a Hezrou) has a AC of 23. The player rolls a 6. 6+14 = 20, compares it to the AC not good enough. The player rolls a 18. He doesn't even bother to do the math, he knows he hits.the player rolls a 7. 7+4=11 is nowhere near enough.Sigh, the default presumption in both systems that the DM keeps the AC hidden makes them harder to compare. (default is player does math in BAB and DM does math in THAC0)I suppose my point is I find it easier to take a Large Static # - A small # <= a Variable #   (ThAC0 - AC<= roll) then to take a Variable # + # or # <= Large static # (roll + 1st BAB or 2nd BAB <= AC)Aside: really find it difficult to communicate math on the forums.</blockquote>