Simple THAC0 Please
Moderator: Moderators
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Simple THAC0 Please
It's been 17 years since I last used THAC0 and for the life of me can't recall how I ever understood it in the first place.
Could someone explain an easy method for calculating THAC0 in terms a non-computer-programmer with dyscalculia can understand?
I know I'm not the only one desperate for answers on this.
Could someone explain an easy method for calculating THAC0 in terms a non-computer-programmer with dyscalculia can understand?
I know I'm not the only one desperate for answers on this.
Last edited by JonSetanta on Mon Dec 10, 2018 6:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
To Hit Armour Class Zero. So if your THAC0 is nine, then for an opponent of AC 0 you need a 9+.
Then for every point your target's AC is above that, you subtract 1 (AC 1 is 8+, AC 2 is 7+) and for every point the AC is below that, you add 1 (AC -1 is 9+, AC -2 is 10+).
Alternatively, "Subtract the AC from your THAC0. That is the minimum number you need to roll."
Then for every point your target's AC is above that, you subtract 1 (AC 1 is 8+, AC 2 is 7+) and for every point the AC is below that, you add 1 (AC -1 is 9+, AC -2 is 10+).
Alternatively, "Subtract the AC from your THAC0. That is the minimum number you need to roll."
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Thanks! I'll also delve into my old book and check the table.Koumei wrote: Alternatively, "Subtract the AC from your THAC0. That is the minimum number you need to roll."
I remember it caps at -10 AC so there was this 1-out-of-20 chance for a L1 Warrior to hit a difficult target, and for a level 20 Warrior it was.... 50%?
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
- angelfromanotherpin
- Overlord
- Posts: 9745
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Not really.JonSetanta wrote:I remember it caps at -10 AC
-10 is the AC you get with the best armor (+5 full plate) and the best shield (+5 shield). Then you can subtract the Dex AC bonus, some item bonus like a ring of protection, etc, for a total AC far below -10.
Except the warrior can have several bonus to hit: a Strength bonus, a magic weapon, etc (obviously, if the target has a +5 full plate and a +5 shield, his opponent should at least have a +5 weapon to be balanced).so there was this 1-out-of-20 chance for a L1 Warrior to hit a difficult target, and for a level 20 Warrior it was.... 50%?
Last edited by GâtFromKI on Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Duke
- Posts: 1725
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:18 pm
We probably played it wrong, but we used the -10 as a hard cap. Once you got there, nothing pushed you past it. Dexterity, rings of protection, etc were all contingency stuff for when you didn't have your armor or shield for whatever reason.GâtFromKI wrote:Not really.JonSetanta wrote:I remember it caps at -10 AC
-10 is the AC you get with the best armor (+5 full plate) and the best shield (+5 shield). Then you can subtract the Dex AC bonus, some item bonus like a ring of protection, etc, for a total AC far below -10.
There were definitely some monsters with better AC (one of the older dragons had -14ish, I think?), so a hard cap at -10 was definitely a houserule.violence in the media wrote:We probably played it wrong, but we used the -10 as a hard cap. Once you got there, nothing pushed you past it. Dexterity, rings of protection, etc were all contingency stuff for when you didn't have your armor or shield for whatever reason.GâtFromKI wrote:Not really.JonSetanta wrote:I remember it caps at -10 AC
-10 is the AC you get with the best armor (+5 full plate) and the best shield (+5 shield). Then you can subtract the Dex AC bonus, some item bonus like a ring of protection, etc, for a total AC far below -10.
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
A character with a THAC0 of 20 would need a 30 to hit AC -10. You'd only get a 1-in-20 in that case with 20s auto-hitting, not due to THAC0.JonSetanta wrote: I remember it caps at -10 AC so there was this 1-out-of-20 chance for a L1 Warrior to hit a difficult target, and for a level 20 Warrior it was.... 50%?
- angelfromanotherpin
- Overlord
- Posts: 9745
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Kind of. The actual rulebook said that AC was a scale from 10 to -10, full stop. That some elder dragons and shit had better than that was just an unexplained fuck you to the players.Emerald wrote:There were definitely some monsters with better AC (one of the older dragons had -14ish, I think?), so a hard cap at -10 was definitely a houserule.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Maybe different printings of AD&D?angelfromanotherpin wrote:Kind of. The actual rulebook said that AC was a scale from 10 to -10, full stop. That some elder dragons and shit had better than that was just an unexplained fuck you to the players.Emerald wrote:There were definitely some monsters with better AC (one of the older dragons had -14ish, I think?), so a hard cap at -10 was definitely a houserule.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Aha!K wrote:The -10 cap was for PCs. Monsters could go lower.
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
-10 only a PC cap in 2nd edition as well. PCs in 1st edition faced some wickedly complicated stacking rules on AC bonuses, hidden in the magic item descriptions mostly, but there was the odd one got down to -14 after Unearthed Arcana with full plate.
-8 best for 1e Wizards, easy to hit -10 in 2nd edition with the AC 0 bracers and robes.
-8 best for 1e Wizards, easy to hit -10 in 2nd edition with the AC 0 bracers and robes.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.