|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 10:53:02 GMT -5
Saying it speeds up the game is a completely untrue and there is no unnecessary layer.. Speaking as someone who really likes traditional AC for it's quirkiness, I strongly disagree with this. Which is faster and which has an unnecessary layer: A) roll a die then cross-reference the value on a table. Or, B) Roll a die. Answer? |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 10:55:01 GMT -5
OSR says to make the game your own, not be dogmatic about the past. And great posts, btw. I'm really enjoying reading your campaign details. You are a very creative person. I wish I had half your imagination. Thanx! The Stolen World is my attempt to start over with my group. New rules , new Chars, new world. BRW feel free to drop some requests or questions about any of it, I am getting quite a bit of love here and I feel appreciated by posts like this. All of it much-deserved. You are so prolific, I can barely keep up! I will absolutely provide feedback when I can digest it all!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 10:59:03 GMT -5
Thanx! The Stolen World is my attempt to start over with my group. New rules , new Chars, new world. BRW feel free to drop some requests or questions about any of it, I am getting quite a bit of love here and I feel appreciated by posts like this. All of it much-deserved. You are so prolific, I can barely keep up! I will absolutely provide feedback when I can digest it all!!! Actually the vast majority of the stuff I brought here from another site, The only new thing is the Rules Beta. But I did have a huge Muse driven work of like a month a couple of months ago. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 11:04:09 GMT -5
Thanx! The Stolen World is my attempt to start over with my group. New rules , new Chars, new world. BRW feel free to drop some requests or questions about any of it, I am getting quite a bit of love here and I feel appreciated by posts like this. All of it much-deserved. You are so prolific, I can barely keep up! I will absolutely provide feedback when I can digest it all!!! With what you read so far, whats your Fav? |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 11:08:46 GMT -5
I'll post my thoughts on your respective threads so as not to clog up this one any more than it already is. And sorry about that!!
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 11:15:18 GMT -5
I'll post my thoughts on your respective threads so as not clog up this one any more than it already is. And sorry about that!!Thanx for loading some feedback! |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 13, 2017 11:47:00 GMT -5
I did not say AAC was shameful, I said forcing me to use it if I want to publish using S&W is shameful, there was zero reason for them to go there with that ruleset. Saying it speeds up the game is a completely untrue and there is no unnecessary layer. OD&D uses descending AC you start at 9 and go down to 2, instead of where ever the 3E d20 AAC starts. Men & Magic does not have AAC in the tables. They forced you to write and publish a S&W product? I'm fairly certain that's illegal. You should sue. If that's actually true (which it's not) that would indeed be shameful. Don't like it? Don't use it. Who cares what S&W does? There is NOTHING shameful about tweaking, houseruling, and altering rules to suit one's preference. They have every right to do what they will with their product. That's the American way. That's as old school as it gets. For someone who touts the superiority of DIY and sandboxes, you of all people should be able to respect differing systems and making things your own. It's the truly old school way. S&W forces you to do nothing. Create your own product if you prefer. And yes, M&M DOES have AAC in the tables. It's the first column of both combat matrices. It maps directly to the armor types. It's right there in plain sight. I'll post a screenshot if you like. What am I missing here? Where is all of this complete misunderstanding of what I am saying coming from? Let's start over, the original and only purpose of clones was to allow people to publish material for old school games legally by using the fig leaf of the OGL/SRD so people could legally publish (free or for sale) material for old school D&D. So here is a fact, when you are supposedly writing something for the old school audience and you put in duel AC columns for both old school gaming and new school gaming I have no problem with that, but when you tell me that if I use your product I have to do the same thing I have every right to claim foul play for doing that and I don't have use it. But for you to say that I don't have a right to object to such nonsense by a publisher is out of line IMO. Do they have a right to do what they did, no one, including me is disputing that. Am I entitled to feel what they did is a bad thing, yes I have every right to feel that way. You can continue to derail this thread telling me I don't have a right to feel that way, but nevertheless I do have right to feel that way. And at least here on my forum or on my blog I have a right to express what I feel, even if I don't have that right anywhere else. If you don't like my feelings, then you have expressed that, but I thing trying to browbeat me into changing my feelings about it is not going to be successful. This is not the first thread that you have taken issue with me recently and it is quite wearing on me to deal with. I am trying to treat you (and everyone else) fairly and if there is something I did that really offended you (or others) them I am sorry for that and wish you (or others) would tell me what it is that I did. But attacking everything I say in multiple threads, and recently I am really feeling that way, is taking emotional energy that I do not have to spare right now. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 13, 2017 11:54:19 GMT -5
Saying it speeds up the game is a completely untrue and there is no unnecessary layer.. Speaking as someone who really likes traditional AC for it's quirkiness, I strongly disagree with this. Which is faster and which has an unnecessary layer: A) roll a die then cross-reference the value on a table. Or, B) Roll a die. Answer? I don't have a copy of 5E so if they stripped out all the combat tables out I was not aware of that. So if the monster is similar AC to plate (whatever that AC might be. I roll the d20 and then regardless of the level my fighter is I automatically know if I hit or not? How does that work? From many, many online posts I do know from peoples own words that a combat sequence that I can run in about 10-15 minutes can take two-three hours according to posts by 3E DM's. Does 5E bring the time back down to even faster than OD&D? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 13:07:19 GMT -5
Welcome to the Internet.
I have encountered a lot of people who seem to really hate the idea that I still find OD&D satisfactory.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 13:09:46 GMT -5
but when you tell me that if I use your product I have to do the same thing I have every right to claim foul play for doing that and I don't have use it. Of course you do. And I have every right to to voice my feelings as to why that isn't shameful at all, but actually helpful to many people. We don't have to agree. But for you to say that I don't have a right to object to such nonsense by a publisher is out of line IMO. I never said you don't have a right to object. I said they didn't step on your rights. Big difference. Am I entitled to feel what they did is a bad thing, yes I have every right to feel that way. You can continue to derail this thread telling me I don't have a right to feel that way, but nevertheless I do have right to feel that way. And at least here on my forum or on my blog I have a right to express what I feel, even if I don't have that right anywhere else. If you don't like my feelings, then you have expressed that, but I thing trying to browbeat me into changing my feelings about it is not going to be successful. I have the right to express my feelings as well. If you consider this browbeating, then you are browbeating me into changing my feelings as well. YOU derailed this thread by calling S&W shameful. How is that statement relevant to the OP? Your quote: "For me that was the major flaw with S&W, you can't claim compatibility unless you include the d20 AC values in your product. IMO it is (and I said so at the time) shameful to claim to be old school and then force people to switch AC to d20 to write new products using your system. If anyone wants to use anything, fine with me, but don't tell me I have to." What does that have to do with weapons standing apart? Why start an OSR war out of the blue? Talk about derails! If I'm not allowed to express why I feel it isn't shameful, then point out that AAC exists in M&M as a fun tidbit (which you bristled at for some reason rather than saying something nice like: "oh, that's neat"), then I will no longer do so. Why that riled you up, I have no idea. Your rules around here, though. This is not the first thread that you have taken issue with me recently and it is quite wearing on me to deal with. I am trying to treat you (and everyone else) fairly and if there is something I did that really offended you (or others) them I am sorry for that and wish you (or others) would tell me what it is that I did. But attacking everything I say in multiple threads, and recently I am really feeling that way, is taking emotional energy that I do not have to spare right now. You have done nothing to offend in the slightest, and I hope I haven't either, truly. If you are referring to the thread you locked, well you posted a quote from another forum out-of-context. I tried to provide that context for clarification. I think providing context and clarification for what others said is important. I posted the context and you responded with: "I don't see it, thread deleted." That's not really conducive to healthy discussions. If I'm causing you undue stress, I dearly apologize. I am only trying to be helpful. I will not question or critique your ideas any longer if it's costing you emotional energy. Again, I'm sorry. After all, this is your playground not mine so maybe I will keep my opinions to myself. |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 13:10:45 GMT -5
Welcome to the Internet. I have encountered a lot of people who seem to really hate the idea that I still find OD&D satisfactory. It's not only satisfactory, it's superior in my opinion. You have helped me a ton in the past and been kind enough to answer some (probably for you) basic and annoyingly common questions. I appreciate you explaining the way you do things. I'm still learning. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 13:17:28 GMT -5
Xur Looks around at the chaos and shakes his head and says out loud " Three of my fellow wizards have cast Power Word Derail, what a pity." lol
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 13:19:34 GMT -5
I don't have a copy of 5E so if they stripped out all the combat tables out I was not aware of that. I think 2E was the last edition to have combat tables, but I haven't played 3E or 4E. So if the monster is similar AC to plate (whatever that AC might be. I roll the d20 and then regardless of the level my fighter is I automatically know if I hit or not? How does that work? In 5E, the roll is compared to the monster's AC. No table lookups. I think all WotC editions work this way. From many, many online posts I do know from peoples own words that a combat sequence that I can run in about 10-15 minutes can take two-three hours according to posts by 3E DM's. Does 5E bring the time back down to even faster than OD&D? You are right on all counts. Combat in all WotC games take WAY too long for me. I don't like them at all. I like OD&D and the 3lbbs, in particular, the best because of how fast and loose it plays. It's why I post on this forum. I love OD&D. That doesn't mean it's perfect though. No game is. But, I love it. I've never played an OSR game and I have no desire to do so. OD&D is superior in my view. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 13, 2017 14:07:34 GMT -5
I don't have a copy of 5E so if they stripped out all the combat tables out I was not aware of that. I think 2E was the last edition to have combat tables, but I haven't played 3E or 4E. So if the monster is similar AC to plate (whatever that AC might be. I roll the d20 and then regardless of the level my fighter is I automatically know if I hit or not? How does that work? In 5E, the roll is compared to the monster's AC. No table lookups. I think all WotC editions work this way. From many, many online posts I do know from peoples own words that a combat sequence that I can run in about 10-15 minutes can take two-three hours according to posts by 3E DM's. Does 5E bring the time back down to even faster than OD&D? You are right on all counts. Combat in all WotC games take WAY too long for me. I don't like them at all. I like OD&D and the 3lbbs, in particular, the best because of how fast and loose it plays. It's why I post on this forum. I love OD&D. That doesn't mean it's perfect though. No game is. But, I love it. I've never played an OSR game and I have no desire to do so. OD&D is superior in my view. If there are no combat tables and fighters of all levels need exactly the same roll on a d20 to hit a specific armor class, then I have two questions one is what is the point of levels if there are no benefits in fighting prowess and why is combat so slow when every player makes one die roll and the round is over? I mean based on the above a round of combat should take less than 5 min if you have the size parties most people talk about. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 13, 2017 14:25:54 GMT -5
but when you tell me that if I use your product I have to do the same thing I have every right to claim foul play for doing that and I don't have use it. Of course you do. And I have every right to to voice my feelings as to why that isn't shameful at all, but actually helpful to many people. We don't have to agree. But for you to say that I don't have a right to object to such nonsense by a publisher is out of line IMO. I never said you don't have a right to object. I said they didn't step on your rights. Big difference. Am I entitled to feel what they did is a bad thing, yes I have every right to feel that way. You can continue to derail this thread telling me I don't have a right to feel that way, but nevertheless I do have right to feel that way. And at least here on my forum or on my blog I have a right to express what I feel, even if I don't have that right anywhere else. If you don't like my feelings, then you have expressed that, but I thing trying to browbeat me into changing my feelings about it is not going to be successful. I have the right to express my feelings as well. If you consider this browbeating, then you are browbeating me into changing my feelings as well. YOU derailed this thread by calling S&W shameful. How is that statement relevant to the OP? Your quote: "For me that was the major flaw with S&W, you can't claim compatibility unless you include the d20 AC values in your product. IMO it is (and I said so at the time) shameful to claim to be old school and then force people to switch AC to d20 to write new products using your system. If anyone wants to use anything, fine with me, but don't tell me I have to." What does that have to do with weapons standing apart? Why start an OSR war out of the blue? Talk about derails! If I'm not allowed to express why I feel it isn't shameful, then point out that AAC exists in M&M as a fun tidbit (which you bristled at for some reason rather than saying something nice like: "oh, that's neat"), then I will no longer do so. Why that riled you up, I have no idea. Your rules around here, though. This is not the first thread that you have taken issue with me recently and it is quite wearing on me to deal with. I am trying to treat you (and everyone else) fairly and if there is something I did that really offended you (or others) them I am sorry for that and wish you (or others) would tell me what it is that I did. But attacking everything I say in multiple threads, and recently I am really feeling that way, is taking emotional energy that I do not have to spare right now. You have done nothing to offend in the slightest, and I hope I haven't either, truly. If you are referring to the thread you locked, well you posted a quote from another forum out-of-context. I tried to provide that context for clarification. I think providing context and clarification for what others said is important. I posted the context and you responded with: "I don't see it, thread deleted." That's not really conducive to healthy discussions. If I'm causing you undue stress, I dearly apologize. I am only trying to be helpful. I will not question or critique your ideas any longer if it's costing you emotional energy. Again, I'm sorry. After all, this is your playground not mine so maybe I will keep my opinions to myself. I am quite tired of you misquoting me saying that I said S&W is shameful, that is not what I said, I did say that forcing people who use the product to use dual AC is shameful and that is my opinion. I am not saying you don't have a right to feel otherwise. And I don't want you to quit posting your opinions,; however, you opinion that the M&M in the 3LBBs contains AAC is just not true, do I need to post a screen shot of the tables, it is just not there, that is why I bristled at that, it is not true. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 13, 2017 14:27:02 GMT -5
Welcome to the Internet. I have encountered a lot of people who seem to really hate the idea that I still find OD&D satisfactory. Thank you, we are a very tiny minority. |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 14:35:56 GMT -5
If there are no combat tables and fighters of all levels need exactly the same roll on a d20 to hit a specific armor class All PCs generally gain increases in ability scores and "proficiencies" as they level up which provide a "to hit bonus." It's a mess and I'm not really a fan. More below so you can throw up in your mouth lol. what is the point of levels if there are no benefits in fighting prowess and why is combat so slow when every player makes one die roll and the round is over? Gaining levels earns things like: feats, powers, better crit chances, spells, increased damage, number of hits, number of actions, types of actions, mods to initiative, increased ability scores, self-healing, group buffs, hit points, ad nauseum. Again, it's a mess and very slow. It's basically the kitchen sink philosophy. I much prefer the simplicity of the 3lbbs, tables and all. Combat in modern editions is tedious at best. 5E, to it's credit, simplified things greatly but that's not saying much compared to M&M which is much more streamlined by comparison. None of this is related to the OP so I think we should not engage in edition comparisons in this thread. I'd be happy to discuss all the things 5E still gets wrong on another thread. I feel bad enough as it is. WotC offers basic 5E for free. It only lacks some proprietary monsters, magic items, and class options. So, you can click this to read all about it and answer most your questions: dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 14:42:42 GMT -5
Welcome to the Internet. I have encountered a lot of people who seem to really hate the idea that I still find OD&D satisfactory. Thank you, we are a very tiny minority. I'm in an even tinyer minority cause I want them blended |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 14:53:52 GMT -5
I am quite tired of you misquoting me saying that I said S&W is shameful, that is not what I said, I did say that forcing people who use the product to use dual AC is shameful and that is my opinion. I am not saying you don't have a right to feel otherwise. And I don't want you to quit posting your opinions,; however, you opinion that the M&M in the 3LBBs contains AAC is just not true, do I need to post a screen shot of the tables, it is just not there, that is why I bristled at that, it is not true. You have just said S&W's policy of forcing people who use the product to use dual AC is shameful. I even provided your ENTIRE original quote for clarity so thanks for noticing. What more would you ask of me? If shortening that statement to "S&W is shameful" in the very same post that I quoted your ENTIRE original quote for the sake of brevity bothers you, then I will use that entire quote from now on. Or may I use this new one you just provided instead? I just don't know what to tell you or what you want from me. You have a lot of rules I need to be careful of apparently. Just for the record, I disagree with that opinion, but it doesn't matter what I think. To your second point, please let this go. I was pointing out where you can find an AAC table in 1974. I'm trying to have fun here. It's the first column of both combat matrices. I said it as a fun tidbit. Life is not this serious. If you truly wish to be pedantic, I'll play along, but what I said is true. It's there. I'll post the images if this is a big deal to you:   Let's just have a bit of fun.  |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 14:57:02 GMT -5
Welcome to the Internet. I have encountered a lot of people who seem to really hate the idea that I still find OD&D satisfactory. Thank you, we are a very tiny minority. Seriously. People looked at me like I was crazy when I suggested we play the 3lbbs for a change of pace. Now, we all love it! |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 14:57:21 GMT -5
Thank you, we are a very tiny minority. I'm in an even tinyer minority cause I want them blended Heretic!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 15:01:49 GMT -5
I'm in an even tinyer minority cause I want them blended Heretic!!!! I think Rosa Parks is a more apt definition of me |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 15:07:22 GMT -5
I think Rosa Parks is a more apt definition of me As in breaking up "The Man's" status quo, or Outcast's rap song? Because both are awesome! |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Sept 13, 2017 15:10:50 GMT -5
I'm doing in "The Man", one post at a time
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 15:21:45 GMT -5
I'm doing in "The Man", one post at a time Lol. You are truly doing a yeoman's job, my friend.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 16:12:16 GMT -5
I think and learn in graphic ways. I find a combat table far easier than THAC0.
Also, I do the old wargamer's trick of rolling dice first and THEN looking up the number. I don't need to look up a 1 or a 20, for instance.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 16:49:12 GMT -5
I think and learn in graphic ways. I find a combat table far easier than THAC0. THAC0 is the devil. There is nothing worse than THAC0. I was too young too understand it when I attempted 2E for the first time. I'd take a table over THAC0 and subtraction every day of the week. My experience with Basic D&D bitd was much better with the tables. You could at least write your to hit AC values on your character sheet if you didn't want the DM to look it up every time. For players: roll die, look up value on table, player applies any mods, reports modded AC to DM, DM checks monster AC to determine hit. Not too bad. For DM: player rolls die, Player reports die value, DM applies any mods, DM looks up class and level in the book or DM screen, finds AC hit, checks monster's AC. Equally as good but a taaaaaaad more work for DM. AAC: player rolls die, player applies any mods, reports value to DM, DM checks monster AC. It cuts a step out of the process but it's so easy to use either system with OD&D that arguing about it is silly. YMMV. |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 13, 2017 16:49:49 GMT -5
Also, I do the old wargamer's trick of rolling dice first and THEN looking up the number. I don't need to look up a 1 or a 20, for instance. This is a FANTASTIC tip! I am shamelessly stealing this. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Sept 13, 2017 18:33:41 GMT -5
d20 + HD + AC ≥ 20 is a hit
it's that simple
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 20:14:30 GMT -5
Which is still slower for me than looking it up on a chart.
|
|
