Curious
- DangerDwarf
- Maukling
- Posts: 5284
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: East Texas
Curious
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?
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?
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
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
- DangerDwarf
- Maukling
- Posts: 5284
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: East Texas
- Buttmonkey
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 2047
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 7:00 am
-
paladin2019
- Ungern
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:00 am
-
Lord Dynel
- Maukling
- Posts: 5843
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 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.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.
- DangerDwarf
- Maukling
- Posts: 5284
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: East Texas
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.
Wow, a lot of adders though. I'd have guessed it a little less one-sided.
-
Lord Dynel
- Maukling
- Posts: 5843
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 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
_________________
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.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.
-
paladin2019
- Ungern
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:00 am
So, they understand through the numbers what their characters might divine through their own experience? So what?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).
My response would be to disallow Dex bonuses. If you don't want me using them for critters, you don't get 'em eitherLord Dynel wrote:
If they couldn't find any on a vanquished foe, they glared at me for arbitrarily raising ACs of critters.
- Omote
- Battle Stag
- Posts: 11560
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: The fairest view in the park, Ohio.
- Contact:
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
-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
- DangerDwarf
- Maukling
- Posts: 5284
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: East Texas
-
paladin2019
- Ungern
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:00 am
- DangerDwarf
- Maukling
- Posts: 5284
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: East Texas
-
Lord Dynel
- Maukling
- Posts: 5843
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am
paladin2019 wrote:So, they understand through the numbers what their characters might divine through their own experience? So what?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).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.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.
-
nikkigurlie89
- Skobbit
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 8:00 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. >_<
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. >_<
Add here as well.
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)
Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)
Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org
-
Hrothgar Rannulfr
- Mist Elf
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:00 am
-
paladin2019
- Ungern
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:00 am
-
Hrothgar Rannulfr
- Mist Elf
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:00 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
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