(Optional) 3E Style AC

nbnmare

One aspect of 2nd Edition I've never really liked is its AC/THAC0 system, and from on-line experience I know I'm not along in this opinion. I would imagine it could be very confusing to new players who've never experienced 2E before - in fact, I know it can be since the original Eye of the Beholder left me wondering why leather armor offered better protection than scale mail for quite some time. (EoB - now there's a game that needs an Enhanced Edition!)

What would be great would be if we could have an option ala IWD's 3E Sneak Attack (cheers for that BTW) to switch between the default system and that used in 3E and later editions. In other words, AC would begin at 0 and armor and bonuses would increase the number rather than decrease it. Any written reference to THAC0 would be changed to attack rolls instead; many kits, spells, items, etc already use this wording anyway. Gameplay would remain exactly the same, it would only be the presentation that changed.

For reference, here's how the AC for the games' non-magical armor would look:

Leather Armor: AC 2
Studded Leather Armor: AC 3
Hide Armor: AC 4
Chainmail Armor: AC 5
Splintmail Armor: AC 6
Plate Mail: AC 7
Full Plate Mail: AC 9

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

nbnmare

subtledoctor said:

No way.

2) The amount of work necessary to do this would be obscene.

3) It would break all sorts of mods.

Why and how? Like I said this would only be a change of presentation. I fail to see how flipping a few numbers around would take a huge amount of time and effort - especially as it's already been achieved in the engine (see IWD 2).

I'd imagine that the Backstab -> Sneak Attack option would have required far more work than this would take.

subtledoctor said:

You only find declining AC confusing because you happened to first experience a system that is completely opposite.

Not so. Like I said, I was first exposed to this system with Eye of the Beholder 1 - which was released way back in 1991. I believe that was the first RPG I'd ever played.

And besides, that was one of my points in favor of this requests - most people who've never played an IE game before would also have never experienced 2E or older editions before; either they'd only have experience of later D&D editions/Pathfinder, other RPGs, or no RPG experience at all.

EDIT: From the tone of your post, I'm wondering if you missed the highlighted word in the following sentence: "What would be great would be if we could have an option ala IWD's 3E Sneak Attack"

Wiggles

Really the developers have more pressing issues now with maintaining three games and working on Adventure Y. Would I like them to make optional big changes to the games if they're just sitting on their hands? Yes. But realistically they don't have the time or resources to change the way the games have been for already 15 years now. Also the mods that are already released would likely not work anymore. Honestly, and I'm trying to sound rude here, your best bet is to have someone mod it.

meagloth

No. This is a 2e game that uses 2e rules. Get over it.

nbnmare

Wiggles said:

Also the mods that are already released would likely not work anymore.

I'd really like to understand why mods would not work simply due to a presentation change? It's like claiming a text document will become unreadable if I highlight the chapter names in bold instead of underlining them.

Honestly, and I'm trying to sound rude here, your best bet is to have someone mod it.

I've actually implemented a number of features from later editions of D&D into my games (the ability score modifier system used in all editions from 3E onwards for example), but unfortunately this isn't something which can be modded. So if I could do it, I would do it. But I can't, so I won't . Although, if Overhaul would be willing to make the necessary changes so that modders can do this themselves I would be more than content!

meagloth said:

No. This is a 2e game that uses 2e rules. Get over it.

Oh dear. I guess Overhaul had better go back and remove the 3E Sneak Attack option from IWD:EE, and take out the 3E sorcerer, monk, and barbarian classes that are in the game while they're at it!

Archaos

Have patience. IWDII:EE will be coming soon.

TheGraveDigger

These forums make me sigh... If a respected member had suggested this as an "OPTIONAL" rule, people would have been all over it with the likes and agrees.

Anything that makes the game easier to understand and more consistent is a good thing. Imagine a new player finishing IWD:EE first, and then giving BG:EE a try... he's gonna think his game is bugged/broken.

Yeah, it's probably too much hassle to change... but mostly because of the annoying way item descriptions work.

Archaos

That's not it, in my opinion, @TheGraveDigger‌.

The game is an ADnD game. I think 3E rules are far more intuitive but IWDEE is still ADnD despite some 3E stuff.

And really, this change is pointless. Just reverse them and done.

Personally, I am waiting for IWDII EE, with it's 3E rules.

meagloth

Archaos said:

Have patience. IWDII:EE will be coming soon.

No it won't. They retired the infinity engine. There was a tweet.

Archaos

meagloth said:

No it won't. They retired the infinity engine. There was a tweet.

Where's that tweet?

SapphireIce101

Well, the whole conversation about retiring the Infinity Engine starts on page 12 of the All you wanted to know about Adventure Y thread.

http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/26673/all-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-adventure-y/p12

However, nobody ever links said tweet.

Oh, and later on they do say that after Adventure Y they do plan on using a more modern engine for other projects.

Franpa

I too suggested doing something to make Armour Class more intuitive but it also didn't see much favour from other members of the community

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.