Zero Buzz on 5E...Is It Dead Out The Gate?

[pragma]

That is correct. The total attack modifier is exactly the same for confirmation, and does not need to be reconfigured. It's the easiest roll in D&D since you don't need to do any new math. All you have to do is roll higher then the target number that you needed before. Which is what happened in every 3rd edition D&D game I've played in and observed by working at a gaming store.

The only time it gets creaky is when DMs get all paranoid about keeping the ACs of team monster secret or the inclusion of shitty feats that give special bonuses to confirmation rolls. The fact that you just rolled a 19 and hit (and threatened a crit) doesn't inherently give you a lot of information about what happens if you roll a 13.

-Username17

I've always played with GMs who kept the bad guy's ACs hidden and I've always GMed that way. Now that I think about it, the only thing it seems to buy me is a phase of the fight where players doing some guess and check about who has high AC and who has low. This thread has made me reconsider the policy.

Do people around here usually play with secret bad guy ACs or public ones? Am I overlooking any virtues of keeping them secret until the d20 happens to roll two consecutive numbers?

Happy to split this off into a new thread if need be, but this one is so meandering at this point that I doubt a little discussion here will make a difference.

[fectin]

@pragma,

I've consistently seen it where the first round or so, AC is secret. After the first few hits, it's usually announced. Depends on your table dynamics, but you'll usually save some time and lose nothing of value.

[Kaelik]

I've always been open as fuck if my players ask, and just told them hit or miss if they asked that after rolling.

I remember the first time some player asked about AC in one game I was in, and the DM tried to say it wasn't allowed.

From that moment on, I told all the players the most likely AC(s) of all enemies, and I was usually either right, or within 1-2. The DM finally gave up and just told the players the AC if they asked because he got tired from the "Awh Snap!"s that came at the end of every fight (and sometimes during them) when he told people the AC and my guess was super accurate.

[hamstertamer]

Don't be a blockhead. 10-sided dice where all of the numbers are multiples of 10 are called d100s. If you want to sperg over that, that's what Amazon.com calls them, too.

Listen you can call that d10 a banana if you want. It does not change the fact that the pathfinder beginner box gives you two dice to roll at the same time for percentage checks. Why did they bother when you could just re-roll a d10 again to get the "1s" place? Because of convenience since they expect people to roll 2d10s for percentage checks when it comes up.

btw the pathfinder beginner's box does not call that alternative labeled d10 a d100. Here's a quote, "The Pathfinder RPG Beginner Box includes a d4, a d6, a d8, two different d10s, d12, and a d20."

Further on it says, "The Beginner Box includes two different d10s. Use these together to roll from 1 to 100, called d100 or d%. Roll both dice, then read the two-digit die first as the “tens” and the other as the “ones.” For example, if the dice roll 50 and 7, that’s 57. If they roll 00 and 5, that’s 05. If they roll 00 and 0, that’s 100."

So using those dice together could be called a d100 or d%, but the one labeled with 10s is still a d10 since it cannot count 1 to 100 by itself.

[Aryxbez]

Do people around here usually play with secret bad guy ACs or public ones?

Am I overlooking any virtues of keeping them secret until the d20 happens to roll two consecutive numbers?

I've never played, nor ran a game where I would reveal behind the screen details like that (save when applicable, like hit by a spell, or an effect says otherwise). So I've always seen them kept as a secret, as whole "Memorizing the Monster Manual" like quote probably wouldn't had much traction as a quote if this was a regular practice.

I suppose it was always a metagame type thing, or some pretense of tension or keeping things exciting through some basic secrecy. I haven't seen any issues with doing it, but I have stated "minimums" or "overrolled" values, so they could get a median (Below 20, don't bother, or 30+ hits!). Oddly enough, if I were to run a Dice Pool game like Shadowrun, I'd simply state the Threshold they'd need upfront, though likely due to rolling takes longer vs. D20.

Oh, and I've never heard of D10's being called "D100's",I've heard them called "Percentiles" for the 00-90 die, and D10 is simply a d10.

[Username17]

So using those dice together could be called a d100 or d%, but the one labeled with 10s is still a d10 since it cannot count 1 to 100 by itself.

Well, it can't count to 1 at all, but it certainly has no problem rolling 100. It does so one tenth of the time if there isn't a 1s place die rolled at the same time.

The reality is that there honestly isn't an unambiguous word for the ten sided dice that are labeled 10 to 00. Some people call them "percentiles," some people call them "d100s," and some people don't call them anything. But they are a thing that exists, and people are not wrong to use terminology to refer to them.

-Username17

[hamstertamer]

So using those dice together could be called a d100 or d%, but the one labeled with 10s is still a d10 since it cannot count 1 to 100 by itself.

Well, it can't count to 1 at all, but it certainly has no problem rolling 100. It does so one tenth of the time if there isn't a 1s place die rolled at the same time.

The reality is that there honestly isn't an unambiguous word for the ten sided dice that are labeled 10 to 00. Some people call them "percentiles," some people call them "d100s," and some people don't call them anything. But they are a thing that exists, and people are not wrong to use terminology to refer to them.

-Username17

No one's use of terminology is being persecuted here, at least not by me. The original point was that the pathfinder beginner box provided two d10s to roll at the same time, because pathfinder beginner's box expects people to roll them both at the same time for percentage checks. It doesn't matter what you call the d10 for my point to be made, but a certain poster thought so and made a point to inform me that there was no extra d10 in his box but a d100. The extra die is labeled in 10s instead of 1s for convenience of course. The D&D starter kit does not come with an extra d10 (or "d100"), they expect you to re-roll that same d10 for your percentage check, just like they expect you to re-roll a d20 again for adv/dis rolls which happen constantly compared to percentage checks. In both cases, the starter kits do not assume you will have your own dice to use, and they made sure to provide what will be needed to play their rpg. What's strange about the new D&D starter kit is that people here have claimed that the adv/dis rolls are meant to be rolled at the same time (2d20) but you can't do that with your starter dice because there is only one in the box.

[fbmf]

I own the Pathfinder Start Kit. As in, I'm looking at it right now and its crappy orange and white dice. There is one of each of a: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, and d100.

There's d100 in your box? Really? There's a die with one hundred sides. Wow that's strange because most people just got an extra d10. Maybe you should counts the sides again to make sure.

Emphasis mine.

No one's use of terminology is being persecuted here, at least not by me.

You were saying?

Game On,
fbmf

[GâtFromKI]

But you don't know that. You know that you rolled a 19, plus 7 for your normal bonus is 26, plus 2 for charge is 28, plus 1 for the bard is 29. Oh, and 2 more because you're raging is 31. Did that hit?
Roll to confirm? Oh, okay.
So thats 16, plus 7 is 23... (etc). Does a 28 still hit?

This never happens like this.

Either it was your first attack, and the character hit because you rolled a 19 and you're not some moron who try to attack although you don't hit with a 19 and full BAB. So you don't calculate the final result, you say "I hit and it's a threat", and roll for the confirmation.

Either it was your third or fourth iterative attack, and you already added all those bonus to several attacks before, and since you're not a goldfish, you remember the whole set of bonus.

[zugschef]

If you have two d10 of the same color you couldn't tell which one is the d100 and which one is the d10. That's why one of the dice shows decimals and one digits. So yes, there is a fuckin' d100.

[fectin]

But you don't know that. You know that you rolled a 19, plus 7 for your normal bonus is 26, plus 2 for charge is 28, plus 1 for the bard is 29. Oh, and 2 more because you're raging is 31. Did that hit?
Roll to confirm? Oh, okay.
So thats 16, plus 7 is 23... (etc). Does a 28 still hit?

This never happens like this.

Either it was your first attack, and the character hit because you rolled a 19 and you're not some moron who try to attack although you don't hit with a 19 and full BAB. So you don't calculate the final result, you say "I hit and it's a threat", and roll for the confirmation.

Either it was your third or fourth iterative attack, and you already added all those bonus to several attacks before, and since you're not a goldfish, you remember the whole set of bonus.

Two other people have already said it's exactly like this. I'm happy for you that your tables have been free of of it.

Many tables don't see gnomes in play, or a disparity between casters and martials. Anecdotes are very poor evidence for absence.

[Kaelik]

But you don't know that. You know that you rolled a 19, plus 7 for your normal bonus is 26, plus 2 for charge is 28, plus 1 for the bard is 29. Oh, and 2 more because you're raging is 31. Did that hit?
Roll to confirm? Oh, okay.
So thats 16, plus 7 is 23... (etc). Does a 28 still hit?

This never happens like this.

Either it was your first attack, and the character hit because you rolled a 19 and you're not some moron who try to attack although you don't hit with a 19 and full BAB. So you don't calculate the final result, you say "I hit and it's a threat", and roll for the confirmation.

Either it was your third or fourth iterative attack, and you already added all those bonus to several attacks before, and since you're not a goldfish, you remember the whole set of bonus.

Two other people have already said it's exactly like this. I'm happy for you that your tables have been free of of it.

Many tables don't see gnomes in play, or a disparity between casters and martials. Anecdotes are very poor evidence for absence.

I arbitrarily assert that lots of tables actually resolve attack rolls by rolling dice, then being unable to add, then just making it up because adding is hard. But you can't disprove me with ancedotes.

Also you know, I for some reason don't have the burden of proof for my completely evidenceless assertion because my name is fectin.

I'd point out the argument that you are about to make, that you personally game with the kind of blithering morons withe goldfish memories and the inability to figure out whether they are charging before rolling the attack they make after a charge, and therefore X is hard and bad and should be done away with, is really just a Zak S argument, but since you regularly take the side of Zak S in all arguments, it wouldn't stop you.

[OgreBattle]

So, how does D&D5e compare with AD&D?

[Lago PARANOIA]

Which AD&D?

[hamstertamer]

I own the Pathfinder Start Kit. As in, I'm looking at it right now and its crappy orange and white dice. There is one of each of a: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, and d100.

There's d100 in your box? Really? There's a die with one hundred sides. Wow that's strange because most people just got an extra d10. Maybe you should counts the sides again to make sure.

Emphasis mine.

No one's use of terminology is being persecuted here, at least not by me.

You were saying?
fbmf

He was the one who attempted to claim it wasn't a d10 to score a point, a very bad point. I was mocking him. Try reading the thread more carefully.

[fbmf]

Huh?

Of course I get that you were mocking him. You were mocking him by persecuting his terminology.

Game On,
fbmf

[erik]

No one's use of terminology is being persecuted here, at least not by me.

I was mocking him. Try reading the thread more carefully.

Ah so self-unaware. So cute.

[hamstertamer]

Huh?

Of course I get that you were mocking him. You were mocking him by persecuting his terminology.

Game On,
fbmf

Did you read thread? I told him he can call the d10 anything he wants, it does not change the fact you are supposed roll that d10 and the other d10 together for percentage checks. He was trying to claim that the extra d10 wasn't a d10 at all when he called it a d100. He can call it that if he wants, he can call it the super die or spunk monkey die or ultra special wonderful die, I don't care, but it is still a d10 as well, and more accurately and precisely called that.

[fbmf]

Huh?

Of course I get that you were mocking him. You were mocking him by persecuting his terminology.

Game On,
fbmf

Did you read thread? I told him he can call the d10 anything he wants

You did that after you mocked his terminology, which you subsequently claimed you never did. Listen, I've never called the tens place d10 a d100 either. I'm not saying you should feel bad for doing it. I'm saying you did it, and then later claimed you didn't do it.

And for that, you should feel bad.

Game On,
fbmf

[Korwin]

There's d100 in your box? Really? There's a die with one hundred sides. Wow that's strange because most people just got an extra d10. Maybe you should counts the sides again to make sure.

Emphasis mine.

No one's use of terminology is being persecuted here, at least not by me.

You were saying?
fbmf

He was the one who attempted to claim it wasn't a d10 to score a point, a very bad point. I was mocking him. Try reading the thread more carefully.

You do know, that there are dice with one hundred sides, right?

[Foxwarrior]

That can't be a serious question if you ask it of someone who has one for their profile picture.

[Korwin]

That can't be a serious question if you ask it of someone who has one for their profile picture.

Ha, I do should look at them occasionally...

[Dean]

So, how does D&D5e compare with AD&D?

That's an interesting question and having read through both rulebooks for the first time I've been asking myself that a lot.

Neither one is a clear winner. 5E's is less random, its rules are more clear and it makes character concepts come online quicker. On the other hand 5E's character concepts are worse. 2E's class and kit system is much better than 5E's bullshit shallow classes. 2E has more choices in general and they offer you more meaningful choices in your builds. 2E also is going to have a better monster manual because all of 5E's monster concepts are bad. There's gonna be no beating 2E's high verisimilitude monsters with discussions about their ecology and mating habits and awesome shit like that right in the monster entry.

All in all 5E is better than 4E or OD&D but worse than 3rd or 2nd. So the final order of edition quality goes.

3rd Edition: Great in a lot of ways
AD&D: Genuinely fun but a little archaic.
5E: Functional but extremely shallow.
OD&D: Simple but with lots of promise.
4E: Dull to the point that it verges on unplayable.

[Dogbert]

So, how does D&D5e compare with AD&D?

We won't have a concrete answer to that until December. But from what we can see so far... let's say that in some parallel Earth that never had 3E o 4E, this would be their 3E.

It has many good ideas and implementation is not a complete trainwreck, just don't expect the system to make sense half the time and don't expect full zero-to-hero gameplay (it seems to be more on the Dark Heressy side of things).

[hamstertamer]

Emphasis mine.



You were saying?
fbmf

He was the one who attempted to claim it wasn't a d10 to score a point, a very bad point. I was mocking him. Try reading the thread more carefully.

You do know, that there are dice with one hundred sides, right?

Oh, I know it.