Skip to content

thac0 sucks and needs to die in a fire!

2»

Comments

  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    As much as I like positive and higher numbers being better a la 3E and above, thac0 is kind of hardcoded into BG. I don't think it's possible, nor would the effort really be worth it if it were possible.
  • blackchimesblackchimes Member Posts: 323
    Fortunately you do not need to calculate, or even know, your ThAC0 in the BG saga. Ever.

    All you need to know is: Fighter classes are good at hitting things. Caster classes are bad at hitting things. Rogue classes are mediocre at hitting things. +x wepaons are good. Weapon proficiencies are good.

    All of this is quite intuitive isn't it?
  • pixie359pixie359 Member Posts: 251
    Sometimes as a new player I found that I wanted to know whether I was better off hitting with a good weapon I'd found but hadn't specialised in rather than a normal weapon I had and was master (or whatever proficiency) of.

    eg I have a normal bastard sword, which I have two pips in. I have just found Blade of Roses, but have no Long Sword skills. Should I swap?

    If my Thief with UAI wants to dispel on hit, should he use Staff of the Magi with his pips, or Carsomyr without?
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    pixie359 said:

    Sometimes as a new player I found that I wanted to know whether I was better off hitting with a good weapon I'd found but hadn't specialised in rather than a normal weapon I had and was master (or whatever proficiency) of.

    eg I have a normal bastard sword, which I have two pips in. I have just found Blade of Roses, but have no Long Sword skills. Should I swap?

    If my Thief with UAI wants to dispel on hit, should he use Staff of the Magi with his pips, or Carsomyr without?

    Warriors lose the least amount of Thac0 when using a weapon they aren't proficient in. That said what is your charisma? You really won't see a benefit of a charisma that is over 20.
  • pixie359pixie359 Member Posts: 251
    @elminster I was just giving examples to @blackchimes of when you might want to know your THAC0, none of those are live questions for me, and I chose Blade of Roses because I'd forgotten the +2 charisma and was going for a straight comparison between a weapon being +x or having proficiency pips.

    Although I agree you can get the gist intuitively, there are occasions where you just can't beat knowing the mechanics to decide what to equip.
  • alnairalnair Member Posts: 561
    edited October 2013
    @pixie359
    Or you could just try the swap and have a look at the value of your THAC0 (handily displayed in the inventory in the EEs), so that you just have to remember "lower is better". The same holds true for AC as well.
  • CutlassJackCutlassJack Member Posts: 493

    Fortunately you do not need to calculate, or even know, your ThAC0 in the BG saga. Ever.

    All you need to know is: Fighter classes are good at hitting things. Caster classes are bad at hitting things. Rogue classes are mediocre at hitting things. +x wepaons are good. Weapon proficiencies are good.

    All of this is quite intuitive isn't it?

    True. In my opinion the 2.5ish rulsets are almost made for computer games. Let the computer figure all that nonsense out instead of having to deal with castle sized, chart covered, GM screens in the PnP version.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437

    True. In my opinion the 2.5ish rulsets are almost made for computer games. Let the computer figure all that nonsense out instead of having to deal with castle sized, chart covered, GM screens in the PnP version.

    You mean like the "Ultimate DM Screen of Doooooom!"? ;-)
  • CutlassJackCutlassJack Member Posts: 493
    Its funny cuz its true :D
  • taltamirtaltamir Member Posts: 288
    Corvino said:

    Admittedly there are a lot of item descriptions that could be cleaned up and unified to say either "+1 bonus" or "-1 bonus" rather than the mixed bag it is at the moment. This applies equally to THAC0, AC and Saving Throws. Clarifying the descriptions to uniformly use a + or - as a bonus would be a big plus (pun intended).

    However, changing BG:EE to 3E BAB and AC just isn't going to happen. They're separate rulesets, and you'd confuse as many people by changing them as you would by keeping it the same.

    Fair argument all around. I would not complain if we just got standardized notation without ever mentioning BAB or 3e
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    loled @ thread name
Sign In or Register to comment.