|
|
|
member
|
member
Joined: Jan 2021
|
I would say either outrageous meme or some really dark twisted story stuff that breaks taboos
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Feb 2021
|
Let's play the what it has a good chance to be and what it wont be. Based from memory of what I read when it was first announced, and partially from what I was curious myself:
Good Idea: Unannounced playable characters from BG1 or BG 2: Viconia, Jahira, Minsc (am I the only one wanting Edwin(a)?)
Bad Idea: Unannounced playable Characters from BG Enhanced Editions/Dragonspear: Because few (no one?) want to play as M'khiin, Baeltoh, or Hexxat
Good Idea: Bringing back characters that everyone enjoys from the previous games/FE lore: Drzzt, Elmenster, Boo, etc
Bad Idea: Bringing back Mizhena
Good Idea: Bringing back play elements from DnD BG1/2: active combat, rolling characters, and other DnD elements that used to be present in the game
Bad Idea: Trying to teach people Thac0.
Good Idea: the characters/npcs have lineage connected to the game: tadpole resistance= Bhaalspawn lineage, Bhaal is the Absolute
Bad Idea: the characters/npcs have lineage connected to the game: Wilson = Owlbear's daddy
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2022
|
My guess is that the surprise will be something on the business end, rather than in the game. Perhaps a spin-off novel or comic, or an official adventure book for DnD5e.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I think that popular theory about whole Dead Three being the Absolute is much more probable ... and honestly lot better.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings.  Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2023
|
Bad Idea: Trying to teach people Thac0. As someone who grew up playing D&D and Advanced, I don't understand all the hatred and confusion surrounding THAC0. It's simple. Instead of of beginning at 1 and going up, you begin at 10 and go down. Plusses "Improve" your AC, so it takes it down. Not sure how it can be more simple than that. LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: May 2023
|
Having Armour -4 and that being A Good Thing is soooo intuitive! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Bad Idea: Trying to teach people Thac0. As someone who grew up playing D&D and Advanced, I don't understand all the hatred and confusion surrounding THAC0. It's simple. Instead of of beginning at 1 and going up, you begin at 10 and go down. Plusses "Improve" your AC, so it takes it down. Not sure how it can be more simple than that. LOL I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. THACO and AC were not intuitive. Intuitive means that you understrand without having to read up on it. Having your attack bonus be best when lower, and armor class preferably be in minus are just not what you expect. Last time I recommended BG2 to a friend he spend good couple hours running without armor, cause he thought putting it on makes him easier to hit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
|
I gotta assume they're being ironic, because it's the exact opposite of intuitive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: May 2023
|
Yes, I was ironic. THACO and AC were not intuitive. Intuitive means that you understrand without having to read up on it. Having your attack bonus be best when lower, and armor class preferably be in minus are just not what you expect. Last time I recommended BG2 to a friend he spend good couple hours running without armor, cause he thought putting it on makes him easier to hit. Armour is also bad for stealth, so ... ![[Linked Image from i.giantitp.com]](https://i.giantitp.com//comics/oots/oots0025.gif) https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0025.html
Last edited by Buba68; 26/05/23 12:22 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2023
|
I gotta assume they're being ironic, because it's the exact opposite of intuitive. Just for clarification, I was being 100% genuine. I do not personally feel it is that complex a concept. But then I come from a place of having played the game when it was 'AD&D' and for several years. So I may be coming from a place that is unique, or at least not the norm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
I played AD&D since I was a kid I the mid 90s. Thac0 was always rubbish and is better off left in the dust bin of table top history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I no one can honestly say THAC0 is intuitive, but it's not as complex as the internet seems to love saying it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
It certainly isn’t complex, but it is absolutely poorly designed. There is a MUCH cleaner, more intuitive way to go about combat, which is what D&D thankfully evolved to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
Instead of of beginning at 1 and going up, you begin at 10 and go down. Plusses "Improve" your AC, so it takes it down. Not sure how it can be more simple than that. LOL Here's how: Have positive modifiers increase things in a positive way. That is, empirically and objectively, more simple than having positives decrease your number. No, THAC0 isn't terribly complex - but it's deliberately poorly designed and more counter-intuitive than it needs to be specifically in order to nerd-gate, like much of the early D&D systems were. It went away, it didn't come back, it never will, and there is a very good reason for that. Edit: Just for those curious, in case anyone is wondering about why there's such a pile-on about this topic to the point of some folks suspecting that Spyder is trolling:
THAC0 system:
- Your THAC0 determines how hard it is for you to hit your opponents.
- Your AC is actually the modifier that enemies use with their roll when trying to hit you.
- You use a spreadsheet that is modified by class, level and race of player character; this sheet has a column accounting for rolling 0 on your 20-sided die, by the way.
- It also has values telling you that you need to roll anywhere up to 26 on your 20-sided die, to hit various opponents.
- The table is not 1-1 number scaling; it has bands and brackets - you will have to consult it or memorise it in full, there is no simple math.
- Your THAC0 tells you how high you need to roll on your d20 to hit an opponent with a theoretical AC of zero - but your opponent will actually have an Armour Class value on a range, and might be -10 (hard to hit) or +10 (easier to hit), so you have to modify your rolled number by their AC
Modern system:
- You have an AC, determined by adding together the values that contribute to it. Enemies do too.
- You have an attack bonus, determined by your ability modifier and level.
- A hit lands if the d20 roll plus the attack modifier meets or exceeds the target's AC.
Spyder may like the THAC0 system, and they may be comfortable and familiar with it, but there's not really room to claim that it is simpler or more intuitive than the system that replaced it. Objectively, it is not.
Last edited by Niara; 27/05/23 02:44 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
I’ll admit to a certain illogical fondness for THAC0 myself, perhaps partly because it takes a bit of getting used to. Maybe it’s similar to folk here in the UK being emotionally attached to the oddity of imperial measurement systems - at least for some things. But I’d agree that the newer AC system is better, simpler and more intuitive (as is the metric system ), and would never advocate for turning time back or implementing THAC0 in a game now, and I may be wrong but I don’t think that was what Spyder was saying either, just that it wasn’t as complicated as all that when you were used to it.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
As a DM who has introduced many new players to this game, the current system is just sublime. My players can focus on their actions and the battle at hand rather than trying to understand obtuse systems, and I can focus on making sure everybody is entertained and being the living computer handling all the background mechanics free from referencing cumbersome charts. It’s just dandy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I don't have fond memories of THAC0 but I'm not sure it constitutes illogical or poor design. Good design should teach you about the game and the mechanics behind it. Learning that everybody is working from a base AC of 10, teaches you that the system is designed around a d20, which then lets you know that range by which every action is working and modified.
The way 5e does it is certainly more 'playable', but so much of the intent behind the rules and their design relies on people knowing what came before at this point that I don't know if it does a good job of teaching people why they're designed the way they are. I guess this is a about THAC0 against 'bounded accuracy' neither of which I would choose over 3e. I'm pretty biased towards 3e, I liked how everything was accounted for in it. Then again, every way of doing it leaves me dissatisfied in one way or another.
Last edited by Sozz; 27/05/23 03:28 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
The way 5e does it is certainly more 'playable', but so much of the intent behind the rules and their design relies on people knowing what came before Not at all. None of the people I’ve recently introduced to D&D played before 5E, and every single one of them understood how combat worked immediately with barely any explanation from me. The only thing that really trips people up is for some reason new players always their their cantrips are all bonus actions and I will usually need to repeat a few times that they aren’t. Not sure what that’s about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2022
|
The only thing that really trips people up is for some reason new players always their their cantrips are all bonus actions and I will usually need to repeat a few times that they aren’t. Not sure what that’s about. free to cast = free action... i see it
Luke Skywalker: I don't, I don't believe it.
Yoda: That is why you failed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
I've actually encountered that a lot with new players as well - folks who make assumptions about what spells are bonus actions and what spells are actions, without reading or checking the spell itself (even with spell cards in front of them), and especially so with cantrips. I am curious about why that specific distinction comes up as a stumble point for new players, when other similar things don't. I think Norway's suggestion is probably part of it, but I feel like there must be more to it that causes so many people who are fresh to D&D in general tripping over this bit.
|
|
|
|
|
