Descending Armor Class vs Ascending Armor Class

[Silver Leaf]

Descending Armor Class vs Ascending Armor Class how do you feel about it?

[Silver Leaf]

I think it is a new school aberration and has been that since it was first introduced.  Descending Armor Class worked just fine, had flavor and was not broken and did not need fixing.

[corbertsronley]

I have been using Descending Armor Class from the beginning and I refuse to change now after all these years.

[The Semi-Retired Gamer]

I can see the appeal of Descending AC. It's what I first learned. Years later, I learned Ascending AC and I have no issues with it at all, You can still be old school in your game with Ascending AC; which AC system you use has zero effect on that. The mechanics are just a tool or a means to an end.

[The Perilous Dreamer]

Jul 23, 2021 16:11:15 GMT -5 The Semi-Retired Gamer said:

I can see the appeal of Descending AC. It's what I first learned. Years later, I learned Ascending AC and I have no issues with it at all, You can still be old school in your game with Ascending AC; which AC system you use has zero effect on that. The mechanics are just a tool or a means to an end.

I use AAC in the 5E game that I am playing in. And it is easy to use. But I don't like it and will not use it as the referee. One thing that really soured me on it is when S&W made it a requirement that you could not say your product was compatible with S&W unless you included dual stating with DAC and AAC both. Granted I have not published anything and at this point I have no intention of using the OGL if I do publish, but telling me in a "so-called" "old school" product that I have to use ACC is IMO an unethical thing to do. 

So while I agree that everything The Semi-Retired Gamer said is true, that forced use of new school mechanics along side the old school mechanics is a poison pill that I refuse to swallow.

[The Semi-Retired Gamer]

Jul 23, 2021 16:50:07 GMT -5 The Perilous Dreamer said:

Jul 23, 2021 16:11:15 GMT -5 The Semi-Retired Gamer said:

I can see the appeal of Descending AC. It's what I first learned. Years later, I learned Ascending AC and I have no issues with it at all, You can still be old school in your game with Ascending AC; which AC system you use has zero effect on that. The mechanics are just a tool or a means to an end.

I use AAC in the 5E game that I am playing in. And it is easy to use. But I don't like it and will not use it as the referee. One thing that really soured me on it is when S&W made it a requirement that you could not say your product was compatible with S&W unless you included dual stating with DAC and AAC both. Granted I have not published anything and at this point I have no intention of using the OGL if I do publish, but telling me in a "so-called" "old school" product that I have to use ACC is IMO an unethical thing to do. 

So while I agree that everything The Semi-Retired Gamer said is true, that forced use of new school mechanics along side the old school mechanics is a poison pill that I refuse to swallow.

The Perilous Dreamer I get what you're saying but - I'm not trying to sell you on it - I always took that as S&W being inclusive of both old style and new style mechanics in their license.  Basically, just for convenience sake the stats have already been converted.

[The Perilous Dreamer]

Jul 23, 2021 17:07:54 GMT -5 The Semi-Retired Gamer said:

Jul 23, 2021 16:50:07 GMT -5 The Perilous Dreamer said:

I use AAC in the 5E game that I am playing in. And it is easy to use. But I don't like it and will not use it as the referee. One thing that really soured me on it is when S&W made it a requirement that you could not say your product was compatible with S&W unless you included dual stating with DAC and AAC both. Granted I have not published anything and at this point I have no intention of using the OGL if I do publish, but telling me in a "so-called" "old school" product that I have to use ACC is IMO an unethical thing to do. 

So while I agree that everything The Semi-Retired Gamer said is true, that forced use of new school mechanics along side the old school mechanics is a poison pill that I refuse to swallow.

The Perilous Dreamer I get what you're saying but - I'm not trying to sell you on it - I always took that as S&W being inclusive of both old style and new style mechanics in their license.  Basically, just for convenience sake the stats have already been converted.

You are completely right as to what was done and why. But personally (this is just me) I find it offensive that if I write something using those rules, I have to use the new style mechanics. Why they did it, is irrelevant to me. AAC is one of the new style mechanics that I like the least of all of them. Forty-six years in on using DAC no one is going to tell me I have to use AAC. I might choose to play in a game with it to hang out with friends, but I won't use a product as a referee or as a writer that forces me to do that with my own stuff.

To be clear, I would not ("being inclusive of both old style and new style mechanics") do this in a product, I would publish two different versions for two completely different audiences if I wanted to do both. And in pdf and POD that is pretty simple to do.

No duel stats, I would do one or the other. If I used a new school mechanic and there could be something where I would do that, I would not use both. 

[hengest]

I always liked descending AC. To me it suggested that the character with a low AC was somehow "hidden" under the ground, while one with a high AC was somehow "up high" and exposed to attack.

Low AC: down inside a burrow

High AC: standing on a table, drawing missile fire and blows from swords

Not a dealbreaker, but I will always prefer descending AC.

[El Borak]

Ascending Armor Class is a deal breaker for me.

[restless]

I will go so far as to say that I don't mind ascending armor classes. What I hate are players who reject old school games on the basis of things like descending armor class or "illogical" saving throw categories.

[hengest]

Jul 25, 2021 19:03:36 GMT -5 restless said:

I will go so far as to say that I don't mind ascending armor classes. What I hate are players who reject old school games on the basis of things like descending armor class or "illogical" saving throw categories.

Now that last sentence I can agree with 100% (perhaps not true blinding hatred, which I doubt is what you mean, but a dislike for the idea of playing with them).

[restless]

Jul 25, 2021 19:13:35 GMT -5 hengest said:

Now that last sentence I can agree with 100% (perhaps not true blinding hatred, which I doubt is what you mean, but a dislike for the idea of playing with them).

Yes, no hate like that. Severe dislike?

I remember a few years ago a friend and I tried to get an old school game going and at the initial meet and greet we had people who were complaining. I asked this one guy why he came when he knew it was for an old school game, or if he showed up just to gripe. Now I noticed that same guy runs the local 5e D&D group on meetup.com. Heh.

[mao]

I tried

i am too used to Ascending and am going to go back. I don't like tables and charts and I was too far from it. Heretic, right?

[restless]

I have sort of moved on to just doing it all similar to "target 20" in my head. Ascending or descending just changes the calculation a little (and weirdly, I have to work it out every time I want to use it again )

[Gawaine]

I prefer Descending AC.

[DFL_GM]

As a young guy, IMO Descending AC is just a more elegant way of doing it. It is like using inches, feet and yards, instead of the metric system. It has life and flavor, instead of being lifeless and boring.

[Barfog]

I despise AAC.

[Molcho]

I would never make the switch to AAC at this late date.

[Armor]

I wouldn't use it myself, but if I were a player and it was used I would not sweat it.

[Kujik]

Option 2

[The Man From Coventry]

Only DAC for me.

[The Master]

No AAC for me at all, no way, no how.

[Dartanian]

AAC sucks.

[Warrior Twin One]

Option 2.

[Warrior Twin Two]

Agreed