Troll Lord Games

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:39 pm**

I'm curious as to how people's minds work when doing the math for SIEGE checks and what have you when playing in a game.

So, lets say you have an 8th level fighter, who has a strength of 16 and is specialized in the longsword. That would make his total bonus when swinging a non-magical longsword be +12 (+8 BtH, +2 Str, +2 Specialization).

So, when you are attacking a creature, who for the purpose of this conversation, has an AC of 20 do you:

A. Roll the d20 then add the +12 to determine if you hit or miss.

or

B. Subtract 20-12, determine you need to roll an 8 or better then roll the die.

The players in my group are all firmly doing option B with every roll. I'm curious because with the ascending AC being "superior" in many peoples eyes, I was curious if a lot of people, like my group, are still doing it the same way we always did with THAC0.

So, are you an adder or subtractor?

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:47 pm**

I do both, because you have to. You have to add the numbers together to get what you're subtracting to see what you need, at minimum. But, if all you do is add (ie, don't care or bother with the subtracting step) then its "faster."

Personally, both just happen, so I can't say which I use over the other -- they're both simple.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:53 pm**

You don't already have your (in this instance) +12 written on your character sheet?

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:57 pm**

We have the +12 already written on the character sheet. The players roll d20 + 12. I don't tell them the AC of the creature, so they can't do the subtraction themselves to see what they'd hit.
_________________
Rusty

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:59 pm**

No, I try to keep as many numbers off my character sheet as I can -- that way I force myself to not think about them. It prevents me from power-gaming. Others have their own idiosyncrasies.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:38 pm**

I roll and then add.
_________________
In this world of LIES... the TRUTH, it means RESISTANCE!

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:20 pm**

Adder, here.
_________________
Sir Dachda McKinty,

Margrave and Knight of Portlandia
Castles & Crusades Society

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:28 pm**

MacLeod wrote:
I roll and then add.

Same here.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:37 pm**

Me, too.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:26 am**

Gotta add, 'cause like someone else said, I roll the dice and say, "I hit AC26 for 12 points of damage." The DM tells me if I hit or not, and maybe if I notice any unusual effects.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:29 am**

Dagger wrote:
We have the +12 already written on the character sheet. The players roll d20 + 12. I don't tell them the AC of the creature, so they can't do the subtraction themselves to see what they'd hit.

This is what I and my players do. Once they figure out the AC of a creature, I do think some then kind of change to a "Target Number" secnario. Usually they roll and add, though.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:00 am**

I never gave it a whole lot of thought until last session when I really noticed that my players all say, "Ok, so I need to roll a #". I give the AC on most critters and let the player determine hit or miss. The exception being important NPC's. For us, I find that helps keep the narrative aspect of combat better because there is less number calling.

Wow, a lot of adders though. I'd have guessed it a little less one-sided.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:36 am**

I actually used to give numbers, too, DD, back in early 2e. Maybe my players were a little more nefarious, but they started to learn the "average" AC's of certain critters. If not they'd ask, "what are they wearing" and "are they using a shield...if so, what kind?" I finally was able to determine that they were trying to figure out what AC they "should" be facing and therefore were able to determine if they had any magical defenses (read: items). If they couldn't find any on a vanquished foe, they glared at me for arbitrarily raising ACs of critters. After dealing with that a little while, I began doing the "roll and add" method.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:48 am**

Lord Dynel wrote:
I finally was able to determine that they were trying to figure out what AC they "should" be facing and therefore were able to determine if they had any magical defenses (read: items).

So, they understand through the numbers what their characters might divine through their own experience? So what?

Lord Dynel wrote:
If they couldn't find any on a vanquished foe, they glared at me for arbitrarily raising ACs of critters.

My response would be to disallow Dex bonuses. If you don't want me using them for critters, you don't get 'em either

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:26 am**

It's natural to add. I add. Subtractors minds focus on to many other things to be 100% into the game... so my theory goes.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:29 am**

I think I'm a subtractor due to more debits than credits in my bank account.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:11 pm**

DangerDwarf wrote:
I think I'm a subtractor due to more debits than credits in my bank account.

Ain't that always the way

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:09 pm**

Also explains why I'm so good with negative numbers too.

Posted: **Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:39 pm**

paladin2019 wrote:
Lord Dynel wrote:
I finally was able to determine that they were trying to figure out what AC they "should" be facing and therefore were able to determine if they had any magical defenses (read: items).
So, they understand through the numbers what their characters might divine through their own experience? So what?
Quote:
There is no "so what" in my games...not anymore. I don't tell them what ACs to shoot for, so they have no mental note to take every time they fight an ogre, for instance. If they do glean what AC they need (literally through "hit and miss") and find out this time around a 16 isn't good enough to hit the ogre - where last time it was - they don't say anything about it. If they look, expecting to find some magical item that ups defense and they don't find anything, they know better to ask me why this ogre wa harder to hit this time. It's just the way it is. This ogre was just a little bit tougher, or quicker, or the like.
paladin2019 wrote: My response would be to disallow Dex bonuses. If you don't want me using them for critters, you don't get 'em either

Heh. That would be a good one. That is one this I did like in 3.x - it broke down AC. So if I really did want to stop using dex bonuses for a critter for one reason or another, it was much easier to do. I couldn't feasibly take away the characters Dex bonuses...they just got to realize that sometimes things aren't static in the world. Not every single solitary ogre is going to have a Dex of 16. I think they grasp that pretty well now, after a little training on my part.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Posted: **Fri Feb 27, 2009 9:31 am**

I have always been an adder, but when me and the party were pitted against anything that took more than three or four rounds to kill (i.e. boss fights.) it usually turned into the guessing game of hitting and missing to figure out the AC of the creature.

our DM was also an adder. He would add the amount of damage we would do to the larger monsters. That way we wouldn't be able to see how many he had left since we never knew what he had to begin with. >_<

Posted: **Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:01 pm**

Add here as well.
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)

Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org

Posted: **Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:21 am**

We use Attack Matrices similar to the ones in the AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide.

The player rolls and adds whatever bonues they have, but the player is not aware of the PC's Base to Hit Bonus and it's not recorded on their sheet.
_________________
Hrothgar Rannlfr
Prisoner of the Horned Helm

Posted: **Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:52 am**

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
but the player is not aware of the PC's Base to Hit Bonus and it's not recorded on their sheet.

????? Are your matrices different from the BtH in the PHB? It should be pretty easy to figure out.

Posted: **Sat Feb 28, 2009 2:54 am**

Yes. They're different.

First, it takes a 12 on the d20 to hit AC 10, instead of a 10 (assuming no bonuses to hit). So, the base is 10% harder than standard.

Also, the equivalent BtH of a 1st Level Fighter is +2, instead of +1. The Cleric and Rogue start at +1 and the Wizard at +0. Also, the classes' BtH don't always progress at the same rate as the book. The fighter is still at +1/lvl (starting at 2nd level), but the other classes' BtH progressions are closer to the fighter than standard. But, the players don't know the progressions for each class.

Furthermore, the matrix I use includes repeating 20's like the old AD&D matrix. If the matrix indicates that a total of 21 is needed, then the character needs to be wielding at least a +1 weapon to hit that AC (on anything other than a natural 20, regardless of other bonuses).
_________________
Hrothgar Rannlfr
Prisoner of the Horned Helm

Posted: **Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:32 am**

Nevermind.

Posted: **Sat Feb 28, 2009 5:04 am**

Adder. If a player needed a 17 or more to hit an opponent then a d20 is rolled and any bonuses are added to it. Simple.

Troll Lord Games

Curious

Curious