Arelith

More of a humor post than anything...

As someone who has been trying to work through the Baulder's Gate series once more and trying to build a decent character to do so, I can't help but bash my head against the desk rather often at how unintuative and painful Thac0 is to work with and think on.

So a huge kudos to whoever came up with the seemingly far more obvious AC/AB/Save mechanic that was implemented starting in DnD 3.0.

PS: If anyone knows any Baulder's Gate mods that converts the displayed numbers into the DnD 3 version rather than the insanity the game came with, please please please let me know.

thac0 isn't that hard, git gud

I loved 2nd edition. Things were so simple and not mechanical oriented...

flower wrote:I loved 2nd edition. Things were so simple and not mechanical oriented...

*hits re-roll until total over 90 is obtained*

Kirito wrote:

flower wrote:I loved 2nd edition. Things were so simple and not mechanical oriented...

*hits re-roll until total over 90 is obtained*

Good luck with this as player in front of DM in paper version

thac0 is wack0

Thac0 is like this,the lower the better.Stop putting much thought into it XD that's how i passed through all BG games.

AB-Higher-More chance to hit your enemy
Thac0-Lower-More chance to hit your enemy

EDIT-Jst lilke that version's AC,the lower the better (a 0 AC on 2nd version is equal to a 20 AC from the 3rd version onwards)

ThacO wasn't that bad.

It was also a very poorly-thought-out bit of game design. The underlying maths it represented work fine, which is why people could wrap their heads around it, but the updated presentation of those maths in 3rd ED were much clearer.

Bless the math guy behind thac0

flower wrote:I loved 2nd edition. Things were so simple and not mechanical oriented...

My dm has a nice rule

You can write in whatever number you want on your character sheet, but if you do, you're expected to be able to roleplay it

It's safer to roll them and if you do roll them you only get to reroll 2 stats

here is my DM's guide! it's been in the family for longer than I have

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/ ... /image.jpg

THAC0 wasn't the only thing that had to go. I'm glad for the changes.

When my companions learned of 3.0 the game turned just into desire after feats and stuff instead story. So my remembers for 3rd editions are negative.

Pfft.

if d20 >= THAC0 - TargetAC
HIT
else
MISS

Peppermint wrote: if d20 >= THAC0 - TargetAC
HIT
else
MISS

Yeah, it's easy enough, especially in 1st edition where you didn't really have to worry about math at all.

But it's also the only mechanic in the 2nd edition that works that way, which isn't very good design. If every other roll in the game was also subtractive, then it wouldn't stand out as such an oddball.

But time moves on and making attack rounds less lengthy and convoluted only helps the pacing of the game. That's one of the things 4th edition did right and one of the things I'm glad made it into 5th.

It's /weird/ to have lower numbers be better.

D&D Golf Rules

Peppermint wrote:Pfft.

if d20 >= THAC0 - TargetAC
HIT
else
MISS

thanks for putting it in terms i can understand dad

As someone who played Baldur's Gate and Planescape Torment, i could never grasp the THAC0.

and i disliked the weapon and armor restrictions. Pretty much every class had unique armor and weapon proficiency, like the 3.0 rogue.
The description reads: only usable by [list 10+ classes here]. I like the Simple and Martial proficiency and the light medium heavy armor types.much more organized and easier to remember.

For me, THAC0 was basically the average roll you needed to hit something.

The creature's armor class score either made it easier or more difficult, but on average, I understood THAC0 was the "average DC" you needed to hit something in combat.

2nd edition will always be my favourite because it captured the quintessential nature of D&D for me.