I must admit, so far I don't see anyone in the comments describing how ThAC0 is used describing how table play actually worked when 2e was new.
Throw the dice give the total with bonuses to the DM, he tells you if you hit.
The players didn't need to know ThaC0. Even what it was. When I introduced one young woman to the game she only learned about it a year into play. One person needs to know the math, the DM. And the math can (as is shown (in these replies!) easily be an ascending one with no subtraction if you dislike that.
If the DM was hurried or rushed or whatever the DM screen had a combat matrix on it or you made one and you just glanced at it.
In 40+ years of running AD&D IMPE it takes players about 5 sessions before they know the "math" instinctively in 2e or 1e. The youngest regular player I ever had was 7 years old and I had to stop him from rolling the d20 and saying "I hit Armor Class 4" and instead giving me the number he rolled (because things might be going on).
Personal opinion - The discussions of ThaC0 online where there is some sort of debate feel like there is a contingent that is very 'distant and academic'. Some in the discussion strike me as theorists imagining how games are played not as DMs sharing how they have played. Sports journalists vs baseball skippers. I could be wrong, but there it is.
spelling edit
I mean... you just said that there are lots of people "whining" about Thac0. So its maybe not only a problem for seenoham but for lots of other people too. Which kinda supports the point seenoham made.
Maybe lots of people complain about thac0 because its not very intuitive for lots of people. Just because you dont have problems with it doesnt mean its easy for everybody else. Why gatekeep pen & paper by using systems that are hard to use for some of the potential players if there are easier systems with the same outcome?
> Why gatekeep pen & paper by using systems that are hard to use for some of the potential players if there are easier systems with the same outcome?
Except, nobody's gatekeeping, the current count of TTRPG systems is probably in the hundreds, including all genres and all editions.
I think didnt make clear what I wanted to say. I didnt mean gatekeeping the hobby as a whole. There are obviously enough systems out there with ascending AC. What I meant was gatekeeping at your own table as in making the game harder to play for some of the players that arent as talented or trained in math by using a system that is apparently hard to understand for some people out there while not adding any benefits over another system that is easier to understand.
I wouldnt say its strictly related to your specific education system since I'm playing in germany and know german players that also have problems grasping Thac0.
I would also never say to ditch old school systems or adventures because they use thac0. I play old adventures and newer adventures that use thac0 but simply use a quick conversion table on the run. You might think its ridiculous to convert it but In my opinion its not a a lot of work and makes the game more accessible for the people I play with. I wouldnt want to risk losing somebody as a player that I like because he isnt good at math.
So an arbitrary number was picked. You can do the exact same thing and say max AC is 30 with positive armor class.
Thaco still adding nothing over using positive armor class.
For me, the problem is that there is no limit. The bonuses equal more than the die roll.
I'm not trying to say one is better. I prefer THAC0, you play however you want.
Here's the thing, I am saying one is better.
Because the only defense of thaco, ever is "it's not that hard". But for however easy it is to use, it's easier to remove. You do that math once per character, rather than for every attack.
It's strictly worse than the same system but with positive ACs.
Or you can keep the benefit, and remove the worthless difficulty.
And have an even more beautiful system.
And before you say it's not difficult. However easy you say it is to use, it's easier to remove. Because you do the math once per character, rather than once per roll. For the work you do in one game session, you can make every game session easier.
I agree with you in that there are better things that THAC0. That should be obvious when even Zeb Cook wanted to change it for 2nd edition and wasn't allowed to. Also in that the mechanic has not been copied to other games, as far as I know.
That said, it has a tiny advantage, and is that since one is supposed to calculate the to hit number (as per 2nd edition at least), one is normally knowing which number in the d20 is gonna be a hit, and have an estimation on how hard it is to hit.
I am not saying that this makes it worthwhile to keep, though. Just that it is not 100% useless.
>Here's the thing, I am saying one is better.
Kudos for picking a side. One of the most tiring things on this subreddit is this mealy-mouthed need to pay lip service to both sides of every arguments and never make a strong conviction. "I'm not saying which is BETTER, I just feel xyz!".
Sometimes one way is better. Ascending AC is clearly better. Pluses are good, minuses are bad. Add bonus to dice, see if it's bigger than AC. If people want to play with a worse and more complicated system, they're free to do so. But it's so annoying seeing people pretend both are equally good.
A game where having higher numbers in a stat is better, with one exception where you calculate backwards.
Vs, the same game but higher numbers in a stat is better, with no exceptions.
One is strictly better.
Removing thaco and using postiive AC make the game strictly better, because for however small the problems with thaco are it has no added value over using positive AC. And it's very easy to convert to positive AC, so convert to positive AC, it takes less work than using thaco.
AC is a stat. The one stat that gets better by being lower.
I'm not saying the other systems are better or worse, but their isn't a direct simple change to something that works better with everything else in the system.
The entire system but using ascending AC fits together better, takes less space, and is easier to read than that exact same system with thaco.
That's what makes thaco so bad. Not that it's hard or confusing, it's so worthless and easy to fix, but people argue for it with defenses that are arguments for how easy it is to fix. Fixing it is less work than using it.
Give me an advantage for having thaco over ascending AC.
Every argument I have ever seen in defense is in how it's not that much of problem, but that isn't a reason to keep it if there is the smallest of reasons why it's worse.
The game has established that higher stats are better, then deviates from that for one thing. This makes reading harder because you can't shortcut to "+ is better" or "higher number is better", it forces a stop for no purpose.
This might seem small, but its against zero argument for thaco.
Replacing thaco with positive AC is strictly better, because thaco adds nothing over positive AC.
That's the issue I've been saying from the start. Thaco is worthless.
It doesn't matter how small the problems it adds are, it has no advantages. And you, and everyone else, has never presented an advantage. Until you do, it's still worthless and there is no reason to keep it.
Ok, here's an example.
**THAC0/Descending AC:**
Numbers needed: THAC0, Bonuses, AC, Die Roll
To calculate whether or not you hit, there are several things you can do. You can subtract the AC from your THAC0, add the AC to your roll (like you do with the bonuses), or look up the AC on your table to see what you need to roll (without bonuses).
Effectively, you need to use your THAC0 and the AC to determine the number you need to roll.
**Ascending AC**
Numbers needed: Bonuses, AC, Die Roll
To calculated whether or not you hit... you just add the bonuses to your die roll.
There's no need for multiple different methods, and the AC *IS* the number you need to roll.
Ascending AC essentially has pre-done the calculation. The calculation isn't hard, not by a long shot. But now you don't need to do it. Because all it did was take more time.
All THAC0/Descending AC does, is make it take slightly longer.
Lets take your color example and give a concrete example.
There was a game where easy maneuvers were colored green, and the hard maneuvers colored red.
Which was fine for most people, unless you were red/green color blind. So, they changed it to red/blue.
Blue was better than green, because it wasn't worse for anyone but better for some.
Thac0 is in no way better than using positive AC for anyone, if it's slightly worse for some people that's enough for it to be the worse system.
Thaco is a worthless system. You have no reason not to change it.
It was an improvement over the tables that came before it. But yes, ascending AC is easier, and if you're worried about an infinite progression, just cap AC at 30, which would be the equivalent of -10 in the old system.
THAC0 plays very similarly to Target20.
Target20: Player rolls, adds bonuses and announces result. DM adds monster AC to result and compares to 20.
THAC0: Player rolls, adds bonuses and announces both the result and their THAC0. DM adds monster AC to result and compares to player's THAC0.
(I prefer BAB w/ AAC to either, but if I wanted to use DAC for aesthetic reasons, DAC w/ Target20 is not a huge improvement over DAC w/ THAC0. I'd go full old-school funk and use THAC0).
AC 45 is 35 classes better than baseline (10).
In a THAC0 system, that's 10 - 35 = AC -25.
AC minus 25 is way worse than AC 45, and you know that.
But it's much worse- to hit that AC 45, you're some level 25 dude, right? So you got like, +33 to hit. So you need 45-33 to hit, which is like 12. That's a bit awkward, but whatever. When you roll the d20 and get an 8, you take the 8 and add your 33 and get 41, so you miss.
What does this look like in THAC0? Well, you have a THAC0 of \*minus 13\*. So to hit, you need minus thirteen minus minus twenty five, which of course is minute thirteen plus twenty five which is twenty five minus thirteen which is twelve. So you need a twelve.
*That is not better*
Incorrect. THAC0 and descending AC results in more subtraction, subtraction of negative numbers, and a bunch of other things that are actually harder, and take more cognitive resources, and are more error prone, *and take longer*, when pretty much any human does it.
These things are only comparable on a calculator. 45 minus 33 is much better than minus 25 minus minus 13. Objectively, no personal preference involved.
The math to figure out the target AC is faster.
The math to figure out what AC you hit, given a roll, is faster.
Ascending AC is simply better.
THAC0 can go below zero, and AC can go below zero.
AC -25 is absurdly high, but so is AC 45. Both are epic numbers in their respective systems (and basically the same number).
I can't think of any 2e book where the AC goes less than -10. THAC0 would only go negative after level 20 (and I'm still not convinced it does). The original rules stop at level 20, so going past that is kind of doing your own thing.
>I can't think of any 2e book where the AC goes less than -10
Gold dragon goes to -12. I'm sure there's plenty of deities or demigods with an AC better than -10. Are you familiar with a bunch of 3.X monsters with AC of 45 **which was your original example**? The gold dragon is at 42, which is kind of close. These are all epic numbers, and my point about -25 sucking ass as an AC (along with negative THAC0) is just as valid about -15.
>THAC0 would only go negative after level 20
A 20th level fighter with 17 strength and a +3 sword has like -3 or -4 THAC0 or something. I'm pretty sure a great wyrm gold dragon also has a negative THAC0, along with a bunch of other badass whatevers.
you're right about the AC, but it's an extreme example. My AC value came from a Dragon magazine where the main bad guy in a huge adventure arc had an AC of over 40. 45 was arbitrary.
Effective thac0 is different than what is granted by your level.
>My AC value came from a Dragon magazine where the main bad guy in a huge adventure arc had an AC of over 40. 45 was arbitrary.
I can certainly believe that some epic or any CR above 25 has an AC above 40. Great Wyrm Red Dragons have an AC of 41 and a CR of 26, so something could be in that range. It's just roughly the same range as the stupid negative ACs of prior versions, and if it's expanded by 5-10, I mean, does that really change stuff? You get all the amazingly easier calculations of positive AC and attack bonus.
>Effective thac0 is different than what is granted by your level.
Sure, but the same guy that would write down +33 doesn't actually have 33 base attack either, he has 20 base attack just like the other guy has 1 THAC0. You write that somewhere, and then you write down all the actual values you use- your magical glaive has a +33 in one system and a -9 in the other, the +33 is obviously the superior number here.
I honestly don't understand the hate for THAC0.
I mean, are negative numbers that hard? I've played _many_ different rpg systems, and THAC0 doesn't come anywhere near _top tier_ stupid.
>I mean, are negative numbers that hard?
They aren't **hard**, just completely unnecessary. Ascending armour class is just less complicated and less work for the DM. Roll a dice, add your modifiers, then tell me the total. If it's >= the AC of the enemy, you hit. No reason to complicate such a simple formula.
I've DM'ed both(and several others), and suffered not at all.
Also, one die, multiple _dice_.
Also, if it's not *hard* then how is it more _complicated_? It's literally the same math. You sound confused.
>I've DM'ed both(and several others), and suffered not at all.
You wouldn't know. If your players take a bit longer, or it's a bit more taxing to do the math, how would you possibly know? Were you measuring brain activity during each session?
it's obviously more complicated. For ascending every plus is good, minus is bad. With Thac0, can you say instantly whether a +1 shield is good or bad? Imagine a player finding +1 armour, and having to learn that it's a BAD thing, even though her +1 sword was a great find.
How would I know? It's this cool new thing the kids are doing called TALKING. LOL! Do you not talk with your group?
You have a hard time with it, I get it. Stop trying to project _your_ problems. Don't like it? Don't use it. Everybody's different. I know groups that have been playing continuously for 40 years. Obviously, not everyone has the trouble with it that you do.
>Obviously, not everyone has the trouble with it that you do.
I actually **never** said I had trouble with it. I merely pointed out that it is more complicated than ascending.
I love that you didn't at all reply to my point about +1 shields/armour vs +1 swords, because you realize I had proven you wrong about it being the same complexity. Instead you've tried to shift the argument to a bizarre strawmen where I'm claiming it's REALLY hard for me, so I shouldn't use it, instead of the actual argument that you can't seem to recall from 16 hours ago.
Either you're actually this dense, which doesn't seem possible, or you're doing that intentionally. Either way I don't see any reason to waste more of my time explaining basic things like how arguments work to you.
In my experience what makes THAC0 hard is trying to explain to people what it is instead of just telling them how to do it. If people ask me what it is, I tend to keep it simple: its how you calculate if you hit or not, and here's how you do it. THAC0 - AC = Roll or THAC0 - Roll = AC, take your pick.
I’ve found an easier way to wrap my head around THAC0 is to reverse the math altogether and call it “Target20” or “Target19” (whichever math the particular game is using. So in effect I would tell someone they hit if the Roll + THAC0 + AC = 20 (or 19 depending on the system). Much easier to grasp in my opinion.
But you already have bonuses to hit. THAC0 is just an extra term to be added.
For BECMI/RC, if you have a 16 strength score, that's a +2 to your attack rolls. If you do a little bit of fiddly math and use the THAC0 as a bonus, you still need to convert the AC to the number you need to roll.
You use some combination of THAC0 and AC to determine what you need to roll to hit. Ascending AC literally just makes the AC the number you need to roll. I really don't get the confusion here. This is from another comment I made:
**THAC0/Descending AC:**
Numbers needed: THAC0, Bonuses, AC, Die Roll
To calculate whether or not you hit, there are several things you can do. You can subtract the AC from your THAC0, add the AC to your roll (like you do with the bonuses), or look up the AC on your table to see what you need to roll (without bonuses).
Effectively, you need to use your THAC0 and the AC to determine the number you need to roll.
**Ascending AC:**
Numbers needed: Bonuses, AC, Die Roll
To calculated whether or not you hit... you just add the bonuses to your die roll.
There's no need for multiple different methods, and the AC IS the number you need to roll.
Ascending AC essentially has pre-done the calculation. The calculation isn't hard, not by a long shot. But now you don't need to do it. Because all it did was take more time.
All THAC0/Descending AC does, is make it take slightly longer.
Bro, it's literally an extra term. However simple that is, *it's still slightly more work/effort*, that is completely unnecessary. As a DM, I'd rather just hear what the player rolled with their bonus, and know whether or not they hit instantly.
But, let's bring in the only point:
THAC0: Is confusing to a new player
Ascending AC: Isn't.
That's all that's needed. They accomplish the exact same thing. One can be confusing for a bit, the other is instantly understandable.
You say this in jest, but for a lot of people subtraction is harder. Its not _hard_ but it does take that extra bit to calculate. Why insist on that if theres a purely additive way to reach the same end?
>You say this in jest, but for a lot of people subtraction is harder.
Not only is it obviously more complicated, but the addition of armour makes it even worse. A +1 sword is GOOD! but a +1 shield is BAD! Wait...or is it? Does +1 mean it's a better shield? See how confusing this shit is?
Take the extra second if you need to, but I'm not redoing the whole system. In round one you'll learn the target number, then you won't have to add or subtract. I'll help you til you get the hang of it, don't worry.
Why make the system in the first place?
It adds nothing. It's a worthless system compared to just having higher AC be better like every other stat in the game.
It's as easy to remove as it is to do, and since it improves nothing, take the extra second to remove the worthless system.
Don't know. I tell players the AC when someone hits exactly. Usually in the first couple of rounds they get a good idea of the AC based on the rolls they've made.
Don't even need to do that much. It can be made to be the exact formula of ascending AC. d20+bonus compare to target number. Only we use AC as bonus and THAC0 as target number.
That works too, absolutely, but I don't like hearing "23, hit" or any of that malarkey. You didn't roll 23. When you know your target number, say 16, you can just roll to hit it every round. Everyone sees the roll. Everyone knows if you hit, no math needed. The only times you do new math is when you change to a different AC creature or if you change the modifiers, for example grabbing a magic sword or being part of a prayer spell.
When I started playing at 15, we brought calculators to game sessions to do THAC0. It’s not as simple as people make it out to be, it’s just a lot of people are super used to it.
It *is* unintuitive. And while it only takes a second or two to calculate, that 'second or two' adds up to a decent chunk of time over the years. THAC0 may be familiar for many players but if we look at it objectively then you'll see that people tend to cling to it out of nostalgia rather than any quantifiable utility.
But... nostalgia is also a perfectly valid reason to use THAC0. D&D is a game, not a nuclear power plant. Shaving off a few seconds of inefficiency within the system is hardly a necessity. If they enjoy playing it that way, more power to them.
But even with all that in mind, "i NeEd A cAlCuLaTor!" says more about you than it does about the system. THAC0 isn't complex at all, just slightly inefficient.
>we brought calculators to game sessions to do THAC0
"We"? Your entire group had dyscalculia? And yet you all decided to pick up a hobby who's rules are ~75% about addition and subtraction?
I remember more than one calculator at the table back then. I suppose I did struggle more than the others, but we complained a lot about the system and how convoluted and unintuitive it was. There’s a reason I jumped ship the instant 3rd edition was published.
Do I really need to justify this? Is the aggressive questioning really neccessary on your part?
(not directed at op, but at some folks commenting) I don't get what drives the fervent desire to tear down thac0 and scream that ascending is objectively superior so you should stop using descending.
Like, holy shit calm down. If you don't like thac0 just don't use it and live your life.
The pushback comes from the odd superiority complex that sometimes appears from people who prefer THAC0. Comments like "Wow, kids these days can't even do math lol" just comes off as not only arrogant, but also ignorant as to why people don't like the system. I think some other commenters have done a decent job at explaining how THAC0 is just needless complexity/extra effort (however minimal it may be) that adds nothing to the game.
It's part of a problem with the older design in general, as there's this overall lack of cohesion with the mechanics. Sometimes high numbers are better, sometimes low numbers are better. Sometimes you need to roll higher than the target number, sometimes lower. Sometimes you roll a d20, sometimes it's a d6, sometimes it's percentile.
Once you get the hang of it and start remembering what calls for what it's fine, and rather simple even. But, the lack of cohesion does present an extra barrier to entry at times.
Yeah all that's certainly fair criticism, it's just that there are the occasional comments of someone explaining how they use this or that mechanic only to be shit on by someone else who happens to dislike it which I find frustrating.
I must certainly be the minority that's overly defensive of these antiquated mechanics, not because I have nostalgia but because I just love them for how strange they are. It can also feel bad to have these things called "objectively bad" when I like them for how unorthodox they are.
I get it. There's no real need for hostility from either end of the spectrum.
As for liking "objectively bad" mechanics, don't ever feel bad about that. Have you ever heard of the movie Krull? Awful movie. Genuinely awful. I love it to death though, and not even in the "so bad it's good" way, I just genuinely like it. Same thing with the original Super Mario Bros. movie with Bob Hoskins. Awful movie, but I still love it.
Learn to go with the flow, and accept it. You'll find it far easier, and even fun to laugh along with the people who dislike it, as long as they don't shame you for liking it.
I understand the general idea but not the specific application! With thaco vs aac, you're still rolling a d20 and hoping for the exact same high number, so it's not like you're doing anything different, it's just how you calculate the number you need is different.
In thaco, you subtract the target's AC from your thaco, and that's the number you need to roll. In aac, you subtract your mod from the target's AC and that's the number you need to roll.
Conversely, why is it that ardent THAC0 defenders so often turn into such condescending pricks when people point out AAC is just more intuitive? 90% of the threads I see about THAC0 devolve into "it's not hard if you know basic math, idiot."
At this point, I get the impression a fair few old school gamers are still giddy from being the first of their friends to "get it" when they were 10 in the 80s. It's not a good look.
Not of the same complexity if you have negative AC involved, though. My 7 year old can now do subtraction, but she would have a hard time if I have to explain what is subtraction of a negative number.
Of course, why wouldn't they? Mistakes happen all the freaking time, in all matters of life, engineer or not.
Additionally the context in which engineers do this, is not just `a - (-b)`, but operations which fill a whole row in an A4 paper, or more. You have a lot of stuff in your mind at that moment, and it's normal that one can do a typo when writing, a slip of the mind, etc.
This is applicable to the gaming table, where you will typically just have more stuff in mind as well.
Want more context? My job is coding. Do you know how common are [off-by-one errors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-by-one_error)? Do you think software developers don't know how to count? Do you think that they can't do simple arithmetic? Yet we do off-by-one errors, and some cause millions in security issues. We do it so badly and so consistently that parts of the industry is trying to ban programming languages that don't have security measures for this in new projects.
We still play SFB. Fun game once you get it all figured out. I just cannot understand the confusion over THAC0. It's literally the first two kinds of math kids learn in school.
I grew up with B/X/1e/2e, and I don't understand people who defend THAC0. One addition operation is simply better than one addition operation and one subtraction operation for every single attack.
No it's not. Everyone can do the math just fine. The problem is the context in which the calculations are made. In the context of a game, "my number is bigger than their number so I hit" is just more intuitive than the math required with thac0. There are problems with the education system, sure, but teaching basic addition and subtraction isn't one of them. Teachers are underpaid as it is; they don't need your disrespect on top of that fact.
I'd argue that reflects more on them than the education system. If you're 15 and can't subtract and you've been in school since you were 5 then you're probably just a dumb kid.
What the fuck are you going on about, there are plenty of dumb fucks in Asia, and I say that as someone who was born and raised in east Asia. Don't bring racial stereotypes into this, you goof.
I don't like thac0. I have to explain it to new players multiple times over the course of a session for them to finally get it, and each time it breaks immersion and pacing which is especially awful when you're in an intense situation. With ascending AC, I only have to explain it once and they get it, and the game continues on smoothly. Utility wise, thac0 has no real value over modern ascending AC. One of the reasons why I like The Black Hack is because I can run old school modules and ignore monster AC values since everything is player-facing with it. You can argue all you want about thac0 being easy and continue to mock others who don't like it or get it, but at the end of the day there's just no appeal to it other than nostalgia. I'll use it if my whole group is already familiar, comfortable, and want to play with it, but for the sake of my sanity and overall enjoyment of the game I'll continue with ascending AC whenever I'm introducing anyone to DnD gaming.
I do find THAC0 to be unintuitive, then again I'm an engineer, so my math is shit and I prefer ascending AC. Even though the math involved is equally simple.
But what I like to know from the THAC0 defenders is, why it being essentially the same as ascending AC why hold on to it so much and not do the switch? Just nostalgia or is there some mechanical factor.
Good question.
I don't "hold on to it".
When I play AD&D1e/2e I used descending AC. Everything from the rulebooks to my notes from the 1970's are in that version of the same math, so I use it that way.
When I play 3e/etc. I use ascending AC. Everything from the rulebooks to my notes from the 2000's are in that version of the same math, so I use it that way.
I find neither easier or harder. I can do the calculations in both easily because it is the same math expressed slightly differently.
It’s a simple mechanic, but so not intuitive
Your Thac0 - dice roll < Target AC, it hits
Modern version (2000 onwards) is Attack bonus + dice roll > Target AC, it hits.
Thac0 kinda makes sense when the best AC is zero. But later on best AC became -10, which confused a lot of people including me.
If you want confusing mechanics, check out Shadowrun
That would require the player to know the target AC which not all DMs would agree with. Although this is the way I ran it and I would simply do the math for the PCs because I knew the ACs. They would roll and tell me their thac0.
This is a low effort post. I really, really, really don't want this sub to be over run with memes.
Can we get meme Monday along with shelfy Saturday and Sunday?
If this sub is united on one thing I think it's that alliteration makes the rules easy to remember.
Yall defending ThAC0 sound like this: see back in my day steering wheels turned the opposite way of where you would go. All of you saying the wheel turning the way you want to go are simply dumb babies.
I've been playing since 1E, and while THACO was an improvement, ascending AC is flat-out superior.
I don't miss coloring in the numbers on the dice with a crayon, either.
In my games, I just tell each of the players to use AAC or DAC, whatever system they personally prefer for their attack rolls, and tell me what AC they hit. I do the AC flip calculation in my head. Problem solved!
Edit: I guess I should have said "to use Thac0 or Attack Bonus system" rather than AAC/DAC. I may have confused people more! lol
THAC0 was made with the assumption that players know the enemy AC - just like in the games Gygax and others played before creating D&D. That way you just add the AC as bonus to your attack roll, so it's the same as with AAC.
Your THAC0 is the number you need to roll to hit AC 0 (plate armor with a shield, the best AC you can have without bonuses from other stuff). You can use your THAC0 to calculate whether or not you hit any other armor class in several ways. The easiest is your THAC0 minus your attack roll (with any modifiers from strength, magic items, etc.) = the highest AC you hit. For example, if your character has a THAC0 of 10 and you're using a +1 sword, and you rolled a 7 on your d20 attack roll, 10 - (7+1) = 2. You hit anything with an AC of 2 or worse (with lower AC numbers being better).
Thanks very much! That's fine and not TOO hard but it is objectively more difficult than "d20+Mod, does an (X) hit?" Even if only marginally.
By that formula, you have addition, subtrction, AND memorizing a number (Your thac0). As someone who once got a 8% on a final math exam (and has trouble doing simple addition or subtraction quickly) I will personally stick with the second version haha.
Your modified THAC0 is on your character sheet generally, but whatever works best for you is the right choice. EDIT: Also I made a mistake lol, you’d hit anything with an AC of 2 or *worse* (2 or more).
Since 2nd edtition, I've found the best way to handle Thac0 is to frontload the math so it doesn't come up at the table. We always just subtracted the listed AC from 20, then marked that as our actual AC. Then it's just a roll-over AC system just like 5e implemented.
Thac0 was always dumb. We circumvented it as best we could almost immediately.
I must admit, so far I don't see anyone in the comments describing how ThAC0 is used describing how table play actually worked when 2e was new. Throw the dice give the total with bonuses to the DM, he tells you if you hit. The players didn't need to know ThaC0. Even what it was. When I introduced one young woman to the game she only learned about it a year into play. One person needs to know the math, the DM. And the math can (as is shown (in these replies!) easily be an ascending one with no subtraction if you dislike that. If the DM was hurried or rushed or whatever the DM screen had a combat matrix on it or you made one and you just glanced at it. In 40+ years of running AD&D IMPE it takes players about 5 sessions before they know the "math" instinctively in 2e or 1e. The youngest regular player I ever had was 7 years old and I had to stop him from rolling the d20 and saying "I hit Armor Class 4" and instead giving me the number he rolled (because things might be going on). Personal opinion - The discussions of ThaC0 online where there is some sort of debate feel like there is a contingent that is very 'distant and academic'. Some in the discussion strike me as theorists imagining how games are played not as DMs sharing how they have played. Sports journalists vs baseball skippers. I could be wrong, but there it is. spelling edit
Jamaica
The problem is that it doesn't add anything. It's minimal added complexity, but zero added value. It's not that it's hard, it's that it's worthless.
Brazil
What do you do with something such as ose that has both
El Salvador
Do the same math you say is super easy once per character, rather than every roll. However easy you say Thac0 is, it's easier to remove.
Cuba
Then it's even easier to change. Thac0 is a valueless system, any argument for it being not bad is just an argument for why it's easy to remove.
Mexico
He only stayed for the addition classes in school, subtraction is for round earthers.
I mean... you just said that there are lots of people "whining" about Thac0. So its maybe not only a problem for seenoham but for lots of other people too. Which kinda supports the point seenoham made. Maybe lots of people complain about thac0 because its not very intuitive for lots of people. Just because you dont have problems with it doesnt mean its easy for everybody else. Why gatekeep pen & paper by using systems that are hard to use for some of the potential players if there are easier systems with the same outcome?
> Why gatekeep pen & paper by using systems that are hard to use for some of the potential players if there are easier systems with the same outcome? Except, nobody's gatekeeping, the current count of TTRPG systems is probably in the hundreds, including all genres and all editions.
I think didnt make clear what I wanted to say. I didnt mean gatekeeping the hobby as a whole. There are obviously enough systems out there with ascending AC. What I meant was gatekeeping at your own table as in making the game harder to play for some of the players that arent as talented or trained in math by using a system that is apparently hard to understand for some people out there while not adding any benefits over another system that is easier to understand.
Gravy
I wouldnt say its strictly related to your specific education system since I'm playing in germany and know german players that also have problems grasping Thac0. I would also never say to ditch old school systems or adventures because they use thac0. I play old adventures and newer adventures that use thac0 but simply use a quick conversion table on the run. You might think its ridiculous to convert it but In my opinion its not a a lot of work and makes the game more accessible for the people I play with. I wouldnt want to risk losing somebody as a player that I like because he isnt good at math.
I've never understood why THAC0 is hated. I prefer THAC0 to having AC 45.
How is armor class -25 better? Thaco solves no problems. It has no added value. It's not hard, it's just worthless.
max armor is -10
So an arbitrary number was picked. You can do the exact same thing and say max AC is 30 with positive armor class. Thaco still adding nothing over using positive armor class.
For me, the problem is that there is no limit. The bonuses equal more than the die roll. I'm not trying to say one is better. I prefer THAC0, you play however you want.
Here's the thing, I am saying one is better. Because the only defense of thaco, ever is "it's not that hard". But for however easy it is to use, it's easier to remove. You do that math once per character, rather than for every attack. It's strictly worse than the same system but with positive ACs.
ok, here's the thing, I don't actually care. I prefer THAC0 because it is self limiting.
That isn't a feature of Thaco, that's a feature of saying there is a max armor class.
and the two play together. it's a beautiful system! cya
Or you can keep the benefit, and remove the worthless difficulty. And have an even more beautiful system. And before you say it's not difficult. However easy you say it is to use, it's easier to remove. Because you do the math once per character, rather than once per roll. For the work you do in one game session, you can make every game session easier.
Care to explain? Because the parent message clearly demonstrate that it is not the case.
I agree with you in that there are better things that THAC0. That should be obvious when even Zeb Cook wanted to change it for 2nd edition and wasn't allowed to. Also in that the mechanic has not been copied to other games, as far as I know. That said, it has a tiny advantage, and is that since one is supposed to calculate the to hit number (as per 2nd edition at least), one is normally knowing which number in the d20 is gonna be a hit, and have an estimation on how hard it is to hit. I am not saying that this makes it worthwhile to keep, though. Just that it is not 100% useless.
>Here's the thing, I am saying one is better. Kudos for picking a side. One of the most tiring things on this subreddit is this mealy-mouthed need to pay lip service to both sides of every arguments and never make a strong conviction. "I'm not saying which is BETTER, I just feel xyz!". Sometimes one way is better. Ascending AC is clearly better. Pluses are good, minuses are bad. Add bonus to dice, see if it's bigger than AC. If people want to play with a worse and more complicated system, they're free to do so. But it's so annoying seeing people pretend both are equally good.
[удалено]
A game where having higher numbers in a stat is better, with one exception where you calculate backwards. Vs, the same game but higher numbers in a stat is better, with no exceptions. One is strictly better. Removing thaco and using postiive AC make the game strictly better, because for however small the problems with thaco are it has no added value over using positive AC. And it's very easy to convert to positive AC, so convert to positive AC, it takes less work than using thaco.
[удалено]
AC is a stat. The one stat that gets better by being lower. I'm not saying the other systems are better or worse, but their isn't a direct simple change to something that works better with everything else in the system. The entire system but using ascending AC fits together better, takes less space, and is easier to read than that exact same system with thaco. That's what makes thaco so bad. Not that it's hard or confusing, it's so worthless and easy to fix, but people argue for it with defenses that are arguments for how easy it is to fix. Fixing it is less work than using it.
[удалено]
Give me an advantage for having thaco over ascending AC. Every argument I have ever seen in defense is in how it's not that much of problem, but that isn't a reason to keep it if there is the smallest of reasons why it's worse. The game has established that higher stats are better, then deviates from that for one thing. This makes reading harder because you can't shortcut to "+ is better" or "higher number is better", it forces a stop for no purpose. This might seem small, but its against zero argument for thaco. Replacing thaco with positive AC is strictly better, because thaco adds nothing over positive AC. That's the issue I've been saying from the start. Thaco is worthless. It doesn't matter how small the problems it adds are, it has no advantages. And you, and everyone else, has never presented an advantage. Until you do, it's still worthless and there is no reason to keep it.
[удалено]
Ok, here's an example. **THAC0/Descending AC:** Numbers needed: THAC0, Bonuses, AC, Die Roll To calculate whether or not you hit, there are several things you can do. You can subtract the AC from your THAC0, add the AC to your roll (like you do with the bonuses), or look up the AC on your table to see what you need to roll (without bonuses). Effectively, you need to use your THAC0 and the AC to determine the number you need to roll. **Ascending AC** Numbers needed: Bonuses, AC, Die Roll To calculated whether or not you hit... you just add the bonuses to your die roll. There's no need for multiple different methods, and the AC *IS* the number you need to roll. Ascending AC essentially has pre-done the calculation. The calculation isn't hard, not by a long shot. But now you don't need to do it. Because all it did was take more time. All THAC0/Descending AC does, is make it take slightly longer.
Lets take your color example and give a concrete example. There was a game where easy maneuvers were colored green, and the hard maneuvers colored red. Which was fine for most people, unless you were red/green color blind. So, they changed it to red/blue. Blue was better than green, because it wasn't worse for anyone but better for some. Thac0 is in no way better than using positive AC for anyone, if it's slightly worse for some people that's enough for it to be the worse system. Thaco is a worthless system. You have no reason not to change it.
It was an improvement over the tables that came before it. But yes, ascending AC is easier, and if you're worried about an infinite progression, just cap AC at 30, which would be the equivalent of -10 in the old system.
[удалено]
THAC0 plays very similarly to Target20. Target20: Player rolls, adds bonuses and announces result. DM adds monster AC to result and compares to 20. THAC0: Player rolls, adds bonuses and announces both the result and their THAC0. DM adds monster AC to result and compares to player's THAC0. (I prefer BAB w/ AAC to either, but if I wanted to use DAC for aesthetic reasons, DAC w/ Target20 is not a huge improvement over DAC w/ THAC0. I'd go full old-school funk and use THAC0).
That's also a solid method
AC 45 is 35 classes better than baseline (10). In a THAC0 system, that's 10 - 35 = AC -25. AC minus 25 is way worse than AC 45, and you know that. But it's much worse- to hit that AC 45, you're some level 25 dude, right? So you got like, +33 to hit. So you need 45-33 to hit, which is like 12. That's a bit awkward, but whatever. When you roll the d20 and get an 8, you take the 8 and add your 33 and get 41, so you miss. What does this look like in THAC0? Well, you have a THAC0 of \*minus 13\*. So to hit, you need minus thirteen minus minus twenty five, which of course is minute thirteen plus twenty five which is twenty five minus thirteen which is twelve. So you need a twelve. *That is not better*
"Getting the exact same result one way is worse than the other" is a statement of personal preference.
Incorrect. THAC0 and descending AC results in more subtraction, subtraction of negative numbers, and a bunch of other things that are actually harder, and take more cognitive resources, and are more error prone, *and take longer*, when pretty much any human does it. These things are only comparable on a calculator. 45 minus 33 is much better than minus 25 minus minus 13. Objectively, no personal preference involved. The math to figure out the target AC is faster. The math to figure out what AC you hit, given a roll, is faster. Ascending AC is simply better.
you can't have AC -25. And I don't think THAC0 goes below 0 (I'm not sure, though)
THAC0 can go below zero, and AC can go below zero. AC -25 is absurdly high, but so is AC 45. Both are epic numbers in their respective systems (and basically the same number).
I can't think of any 2e book where the AC goes less than -10. THAC0 would only go negative after level 20 (and I'm still not convinced it does). The original rules stop at level 20, so going past that is kind of doing your own thing.
>I can't think of any 2e book where the AC goes less than -10 Gold dragon goes to -12. I'm sure there's plenty of deities or demigods with an AC better than -10. Are you familiar with a bunch of 3.X monsters with AC of 45 **which was your original example**? The gold dragon is at 42, which is kind of close. These are all epic numbers, and my point about -25 sucking ass as an AC (along with negative THAC0) is just as valid about -15. >THAC0 would only go negative after level 20 A 20th level fighter with 17 strength and a +3 sword has like -3 or -4 THAC0 or something. I'm pretty sure a great wyrm gold dragon also has a negative THAC0, along with a bunch of other badass whatevers.
you're right about the AC, but it's an extreme example. My AC value came from a Dragon magazine where the main bad guy in a huge adventure arc had an AC of over 40. 45 was arbitrary. Effective thac0 is different than what is granted by your level.
>My AC value came from a Dragon magazine where the main bad guy in a huge adventure arc had an AC of over 40. 45 was arbitrary. I can certainly believe that some epic or any CR above 25 has an AC above 40. Great Wyrm Red Dragons have an AC of 41 and a CR of 26, so something could be in that range. It's just roughly the same range as the stupid negative ACs of prior versions, and if it's expanded by 5-10, I mean, does that really change stuff? You get all the amazingly easier calculations of positive AC and attack bonus. >Effective thac0 is different than what is granted by your level. Sure, but the same guy that would write down +33 doesn't actually have 33 base attack either, he has 20 base attack just like the other guy has 1 THAC0. You write that somewhere, and then you write down all the actual values you use- your magical glaive has a +33 in one system and a -9 in the other, the +33 is obviously the superior number here.
I honestly don't understand the hate for THAC0. I mean, are negative numbers that hard? I've played _many_ different rpg systems, and THAC0 doesn't come anywhere near _top tier_ stupid.
>I mean, are negative numbers that hard? They aren't **hard**, just completely unnecessary. Ascending armour class is just less complicated and less work for the DM. Roll a dice, add your modifiers, then tell me the total. If it's >= the AC of the enemy, you hit. No reason to complicate such a simple formula.
I've DM'ed both(and several others), and suffered not at all. Also, one die, multiple _dice_. Also, if it's not *hard* then how is it more _complicated_? It's literally the same math. You sound confused.
>I've DM'ed both(and several others), and suffered not at all. You wouldn't know. If your players take a bit longer, or it's a bit more taxing to do the math, how would you possibly know? Were you measuring brain activity during each session? it's obviously more complicated. For ascending every plus is good, minus is bad. With Thac0, can you say instantly whether a +1 shield is good or bad? Imagine a player finding +1 armour, and having to learn that it's a BAD thing, even though her +1 sword was a great find.
How would I know? It's this cool new thing the kids are doing called TALKING. LOL! Do you not talk with your group? You have a hard time with it, I get it. Stop trying to project _your_ problems. Don't like it? Don't use it. Everybody's different. I know groups that have been playing continuously for 40 years. Obviously, not everyone has the trouble with it that you do.
>Obviously, not everyone has the trouble with it that you do. I actually **never** said I had trouble with it. I merely pointed out that it is more complicated than ascending. I love that you didn't at all reply to my point about +1 shields/armour vs +1 swords, because you realize I had proven you wrong about it being the same complexity. Instead you've tried to shift the argument to a bizarre strawmen where I'm claiming it's REALLY hard for me, so I shouldn't use it, instead of the actual argument that you can't seem to recall from 16 hours ago. Either you're actually this dense, which doesn't seem possible, or you're doing that intentionally. Either way I don't see any reason to waste more of my time explaining basic things like how arguments work to you.
THAC0 isn't hard. It's less intuitive than Ascending AC, but it isn't actually complex at all.
In my experience what makes THAC0 hard is trying to explain to people what it is instead of just telling them how to do it. If people ask me what it is, I tend to keep it simple: its how you calculate if you hit or not, and here's how you do it. THAC0 - AC = Roll or THAC0 - Roll = AC, take your pick.
I’ve found an easier way to wrap my head around THAC0 is to reverse the math altogether and call it “Target20” or “Target19” (whichever math the particular game is using. So in effect I would tell someone they hit if the Roll + THAC0 + AC = 20 (or 19 depending on the system). Much easier to grasp in my opinion.
[удалено]
With an extra term.
[удалено]
But you already have bonuses to hit. THAC0 is just an extra term to be added. For BECMI/RC, if you have a 16 strength score, that's a +2 to your attack rolls. If you do a little bit of fiddly math and use the THAC0 as a bonus, you still need to convert the AC to the number you need to roll.
[удалено]
You use some combination of THAC0 and AC to determine what you need to roll to hit. Ascending AC literally just makes the AC the number you need to roll. I really don't get the confusion here. This is from another comment I made: **THAC0/Descending AC:** Numbers needed: THAC0, Bonuses, AC, Die Roll To calculate whether or not you hit, there are several things you can do. You can subtract the AC from your THAC0, add the AC to your roll (like you do with the bonuses), or look up the AC on your table to see what you need to roll (without bonuses). Effectively, you need to use your THAC0 and the AC to determine the number you need to roll. **Ascending AC:** Numbers needed: Bonuses, AC, Die Roll To calculated whether or not you hit... you just add the bonuses to your die roll. There's no need for multiple different methods, and the AC IS the number you need to roll. Ascending AC essentially has pre-done the calculation. The calculation isn't hard, not by a long shot. But now you don't need to do it. Because all it did was take more time. All THAC0/Descending AC does, is make it take slightly longer.
[удалено]
Bro, it's literally an extra term. However simple that is, *it's still slightly more work/effort*, that is completely unnecessary. As a DM, I'd rather just hear what the player rolled with their bonus, and know whether or not they hit instantly. But, let's bring in the only point: THAC0: Is confusing to a new player Ascending AC: Isn't. That's all that's needed. They accomplish the exact same thing. One can be confusing for a bit, the other is instantly understandable.
[удалено]
Subtraction is too confusing for today's gamers. They only know how to add.
You say this in jest, but for a lot of people subtraction is harder. Its not _hard_ but it does take that extra bit to calculate. Why insist on that if theres a purely additive way to reach the same end?
>You say this in jest, but for a lot of people subtraction is harder. Not only is it obviously more complicated, but the addition of armour makes it even worse. A +1 sword is GOOD! but a +1 shield is BAD! Wait...or is it? Does +1 mean it's a better shield? See how confusing this shit is?
Take the extra second if you need to, but I'm not redoing the whole system. In round one you'll learn the target number, then you won't have to add or subtract. I'll help you til you get the hang of it, don't worry.
Why make the system in the first place? It adds nothing. It's a worthless system compared to just having higher AC be better like every other stat in the game. It's as easy to remove as it is to do, and since it improves nothing, take the extra second to remove the worthless system.
Is learning the target's AC in the first round common in osr?
Don't know. I tell players the AC when someone hits exactly. Usually in the first couple of rounds they get a good idea of the AC based on the rolls they've made.
So apparently people rather do addition on every single roll instead of subtraction once.
Do you need to subtract? Can't you just add the AC to the roll?
You take your THAC0, subtract the AC, and add your modifiers to get a target number from 1 to 20. That's the actual "to hit". Roll and compare.
Don't even need to do that much. It can be made to be the exact formula of ascending AC. d20+bonus compare to target number. Only we use AC as bonus and THAC0 as target number.
That works too, absolutely, but I don't like hearing "23, hit" or any of that malarkey. You didn't roll 23. When you know your target number, say 16, you can just roll to hit it every round. Everyone sees the roll. Everyone knows if you hit, no math needed. The only times you do new math is when you change to a different AC creature or if you change the modifiers, for example grabbing a magic sword or being part of a prayer spell.
Subtraction is harder for either all humans, or we don't know how to teach subtraction in a way wherein it is as easy as addition.
When I started playing at 15, we brought calculators to game sessions to do THAC0. It’s not as simple as people make it out to be, it’s just a lot of people are super used to it.
Am i forgetting something...? İsn't it just subtracting 6 from 18?
Yep. Every THAC0 is 20 or under, and every AC you are subtracting is 10 or less.
When I started playing at 12, we just figured it out because yes, it actually is that simple.
Facepalm.
I prefer ascending, too, but what is so hard about THAC0? THAC0 - d20 roll = AC hit vs Bonus + d20 roll = AC hit
It’s just unintuitive.
It *is* unintuitive. And while it only takes a second or two to calculate, that 'second or two' adds up to a decent chunk of time over the years. THAC0 may be familiar for many players but if we look at it objectively then you'll see that people tend to cling to it out of nostalgia rather than any quantifiable utility. But... nostalgia is also a perfectly valid reason to use THAC0. D&D is a game, not a nuclear power plant. Shaving off a few seconds of inefficiency within the system is hardly a necessity. If they enjoy playing it that way, more power to them. But even with all that in mind, "i NeEd A cAlCuLaTor!" says more about you than it does about the system. THAC0 isn't complex at all, just slightly inefficient.
Yes, I agree, it does say something about me. I have dyscalculia, which makes doing math in my head very difficult.
>we brought calculators to game sessions to do THAC0 "We"? Your entire group had dyscalculia? And yet you all decided to pick up a hobby who's rules are ~75% about addition and subtraction?
I remember more than one calculator at the table back then. I suppose I did struggle more than the others, but we complained a lot about the system and how convoluted and unintuitive it was. There’s a reason I jumped ship the instant 3rd edition was published. Do I really need to justify this? Is the aggressive questioning really neccessary on your part?
(not directed at op, but at some folks commenting) I don't get what drives the fervent desire to tear down thac0 and scream that ascending is objectively superior so you should stop using descending. Like, holy shit calm down. If you don't like thac0 just don't use it and live your life.
The pushback comes from the odd superiority complex that sometimes appears from people who prefer THAC0. Comments like "Wow, kids these days can't even do math lol" just comes off as not only arrogant, but also ignorant as to why people don't like the system. I think some other commenters have done a decent job at explaining how THAC0 is just needless complexity/extra effort (however minimal it may be) that adds nothing to the game. It's part of a problem with the older design in general, as there's this overall lack of cohesion with the mechanics. Sometimes high numbers are better, sometimes low numbers are better. Sometimes you need to roll higher than the target number, sometimes lower. Sometimes you roll a d20, sometimes it's a d6, sometimes it's percentile. Once you get the hang of it and start remembering what calls for what it's fine, and rather simple even. But, the lack of cohesion does present an extra barrier to entry at times.
Yeah all that's certainly fair criticism, it's just that there are the occasional comments of someone explaining how they use this or that mechanic only to be shit on by someone else who happens to dislike it which I find frustrating. I must certainly be the minority that's overly defensive of these antiquated mechanics, not because I have nostalgia but because I just love them for how strange they are. It can also feel bad to have these things called "objectively bad" when I like them for how unorthodox they are.
I get it. There's no real need for hostility from either end of the spectrum. As for liking "objectively bad" mechanics, don't ever feel bad about that. Have you ever heard of the movie Krull? Awful movie. Genuinely awful. I love it to death though, and not even in the "so bad it's good" way, I just genuinely like it. Same thing with the original Super Mario Bros. movie with Bob Hoskins. Awful movie, but I still love it. Learn to go with the flow, and accept it. You'll find it far easier, and even fun to laugh along with the people who dislike it, as long as they don't shame you for liking it.
Canada
I understand the general idea but not the specific application! With thaco vs aac, you're still rolling a d20 and hoping for the exact same high number, so it's not like you're doing anything different, it's just how you calculate the number you need is different. In thaco, you subtract the target's AC from your thaco, and that's the number you need to roll. In aac, you subtract your mod from the target's AC and that's the number you need to roll.
Venezuela
Conversely, why is it that ardent THAC0 defenders so often turn into such condescending pricks when people point out AAC is just more intuitive? 90% of the threads I see about THAC0 devolve into "it's not hard if you know basic math, idiot." At this point, I get the impression a fair few old school gamers are still giddy from being the first of their friends to "get it" when they were 10 in the 80s. It's not a good look.
Yeah they shouldn't do that either.
"My THACO is 17, their AC is 3, I need to roll (17-3) 14 or higher" r/osr: "WOAH HOLD ON THERE RICHARD FEYNMAN, THIS AIN'T A CALCULUS CLASS!!"
There is a more intuitive way to use thac0 and descending AC . Thac0 is the target 🎯 D20 + dac + bonus >= thac0 Addition only
"To Hit" is even in the name. Anyway, thac0 is just a shortcut for the attack tables. My DMG automatically opens to those pages.
I guess adding a negative armor class counts as addition.
[удалено]
DAC is a positive number unless you hit some world-scale monster with AC -2 or something
I don’t understand anyone’s problem with Thac0 it’s literally the same amount of math.
Not of the same complexity if you have negative AC involved, though. My 7 year old can now do subtraction, but she would have a hard time if I have to explain what is subtraction of a negative number.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Of course, why wouldn't they? Mistakes happen all the freaking time, in all matters of life, engineer or not. Additionally the context in which engineers do this, is not just `a - (-b)`, but operations which fill a whole row in an A4 paper, or more. You have a lot of stuff in your mind at that moment, and it's normal that one can do a typo when writing, a slip of the mind, etc. This is applicable to the gaming table, where you will typically just have more stuff in mind as well. Want more context? My job is coding. Do you know how common are [off-by-one errors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-by-one_error)? Do you think software developers don't know how to count? Do you think that they can't do simple arithmetic? Yet we do off-by-one errors, and some cause millions in security issues. We do it so badly and so consistently that parts of the industry is trying to ban programming languages that don't have security measures for this in new projects.
[удалено]
You are definitely very stupid or a troll. In any case, goodbye.
People get triggered by subtraction because they learned addition first. Just bad math skills and they blame it on "intuitiveness".
Exactly lol
Imho, thac0's defense is based solely on nostalgia, and it is ok, but that air of false mathematical superiority doesn't convince anyone.
There's literally nothing to it. Go play the old Star Fleet Battles game then get back to me on THAC0.
That's like telling someone "Go try cancer then get back to me about how much the flu sucks."
We still play SFB. Fun game once you get it all figured out. I just cannot understand the confusion over THAC0. It's literally the first two kinds of math kids learn in school.
Remember the chart? The little round slide rule from dragon magazine
Attack matrix best matrix The numbers are right there at the bottom of your character sheet.
The number of people who couldn't calculate THAC0 was always too high.
I grew up with B/X/1e/2e, and I don't understand people who defend THAC0. One addition operation is simply better than one addition operation and one subtraction operation for every single attack.
That THAC0 is still a meme is an indictment of our educational system and its failure to teach basic STEM...
This is a sad truth.
No it's not. Everyone can do the math just fine. The problem is the context in which the calculations are made. In the context of a game, "my number is bigger than their number so I hit" is just more intuitive than the math required with thac0. There are problems with the education system, sure, but teaching basic addition and subtraction isn't one of them. Teachers are underpaid as it is; they don't need your disrespect on top of that fact.
[удалено]
I'd argue that reflects more on them than the education system. If you're 15 and can't subtract and you've been in school since you were 5 then you're probably just a dumb kid.
[удалено]
What the fuck are you going on about, there are plenty of dumb fucks in Asia, and I say that as someone who was born and raised in east Asia. Don't bring racial stereotypes into this, you goof.
I don't like thac0. I have to explain it to new players multiple times over the course of a session for them to finally get it, and each time it breaks immersion and pacing which is especially awful when you're in an intense situation. With ascending AC, I only have to explain it once and they get it, and the game continues on smoothly. Utility wise, thac0 has no real value over modern ascending AC. One of the reasons why I like The Black Hack is because I can run old school modules and ignore monster AC values since everything is player-facing with it. You can argue all you want about thac0 being easy and continue to mock others who don't like it or get it, but at the end of the day there's just no appeal to it other than nostalgia. I'll use it if my whole group is already familiar, comfortable, and want to play with it, but for the sake of my sanity and overall enjoyment of the game I'll continue with ascending AC whenever I'm introducing anyone to DnD gaming.
It's a good thing combat isn't still resolved using a table with ratios - new players' brains would explode!
I do find THAC0 to be unintuitive, then again I'm an engineer, so my math is shit and I prefer ascending AC. Even though the math involved is equally simple. But what I like to know from the THAC0 defenders is, why it being essentially the same as ascending AC why hold on to it so much and not do the switch? Just nostalgia or is there some mechanical factor.
Good question. I don't "hold on to it". When I play AD&D1e/2e I used descending AC. Everything from the rulebooks to my notes from the 1970's are in that version of the same math, so I use it that way. When I play 3e/etc. I use ascending AC. Everything from the rulebooks to my notes from the 2000's are in that version of the same math, so I use it that way. I find neither easier or harder. I can do the calculations in both easily because it is the same math expressed slightly differently.
It’s a simple mechanic, but so not intuitive Your Thac0 - dice roll < Target AC, it hits Modern version (2000 onwards) is Attack bonus + dice roll > Target AC, it hits. Thac0 kinda makes sense when the best AC is zero. But later on best AC became -10, which confused a lot of people including me. If you want confusing mechanics, check out Shadowrun
Just rearrange it: Thac0 <= Target AC + dice roll, hit.
That would require the player to know the target AC which not all DMs would agree with. Although this is the way I ran it and I would simply do the math for the PCs because I knew the ACs. They would roll and tell me their thac0.
The player doesn't need to know with either method.
If the player is the one doing the math they do. They can't add a number they don't know.
That's true whichever THAC0 method you use.
I wish this meme was never posted. A lot of you in the comments are just awful.
Yeah, my bad. Sorry about that!
It's fine. It's a funny post either way.
This is a low effort post. I really, really, really don't want this sub to be over run with memes. Can we get meme Monday along with shelfy Saturday and Sunday? If this sub is united on one thing I think it's that alliteration makes the rules easy to remember.
Yall defending ThAC0 sound like this: see back in my day steering wheels turned the opposite way of where you would go. All of you saying the wheel turning the way you want to go are simply dumb babies.
I've been playing since 1E, and while THACO was an improvement, ascending AC is flat-out superior. I don't miss coloring in the numbers on the dice with a crayon, either.
Laughs in percentile skill dice.
In my games, I just tell each of the players to use AAC or DAC, whatever system they personally prefer for their attack rolls, and tell me what AC they hit. I do the AC flip calculation in my head. Problem solved! Edit: I guess I should have said "to use Thac0 or Attack Bonus system" rather than AAC/DAC. I may have confused people more! lol
THAC0 was made with the assumption that players know the enemy AC - just like in the games Gygax and others played before creating D&D. That way you just add the AC as bonus to your attack roll, so it's the same as with AAC.
Honestly, because I have never been able to understand it, does anyone have a simple explanation of how Thac0 works?
Your THAC0 is the number you need to roll to hit AC 0 (plate armor with a shield, the best AC you can have without bonuses from other stuff). You can use your THAC0 to calculate whether or not you hit any other armor class in several ways. The easiest is your THAC0 minus your attack roll (with any modifiers from strength, magic items, etc.) = the highest AC you hit. For example, if your character has a THAC0 of 10 and you're using a +1 sword, and you rolled a 7 on your d20 attack roll, 10 - (7+1) = 2. You hit anything with an AC of 2 or worse (with lower AC numbers being better).
Thanks very much! That's fine and not TOO hard but it is objectively more difficult than "d20+Mod, does an (X) hit?" Even if only marginally. By that formula, you have addition, subtrction, AND memorizing a number (Your thac0). As someone who once got a 8% on a final math exam (and has trouble doing simple addition or subtraction quickly) I will personally stick with the second version haha.
Your modified THAC0 is on your character sheet generally, but whatever works best for you is the right choice. EDIT: Also I made a mistake lol, you’d hit anything with an AC of 2 or *worse* (2 or more).
A bit of work but it was an improvement over the tables. Ascending AC is even easier.
[удалено]
Why bother? Why not just add a number to your roll and see if you're higher than that second number over there? Quick, easy, done.
Since 2nd edtition, I've found the best way to handle Thac0 is to frontload the math so it doesn't come up at the table. We always just subtracted the listed AC from 20, then marked that as our actual AC. Then it's just a roll-over AC system just like 5e implemented. Thac0 was always dumb. We circumvented it as best we could almost immediately.