![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Elite Waterdeep Guard
![]() Join Date: October 17, 2001
Location: Hollis, New York, USA
Posts: 11
|
Could someone please explain this to me. I was under the impression that the attack roll plays out as follows. THAC0 of attacker minus the AC of attackee. The attacker must then roll that number or higher on a 20 sided die to inflict damage. That makes sense. But what about when the AC goes below zero? Then you wind up adding the two number instead of subtracting. Does this make sense? If so, how?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Symbol of Cyric
![]() Join Date: August 19, 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Age: 47
Posts: 1,224
|
if you factor in strength bonuses, weapon bonuses, specialty bonuses, elves have a +1 to hit with long, short swords, and all bows as well. factor all of this in, and it is indeed possible to hit an AC below zero.
![]() ------------------ Morgan Corbesant, Elven BladeSinger, Captain of the army of the Seldarine |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Okay, when D&D first came out, they used a 20 sided die. Now this is still used internally in the game BG. Say you have a THAC0 of 15, that means that you need to roll a 15 on that 20 sided die to hit AC 0. Say you're THAC0 was 10, then you'd only need a 10 to hit AC 0. If you're THAC0 was 12 and your enemies' AC was 4, you would need to roll an 8 on that 20 sided die. Understand?
![]() ------------------ ![]() Formidable Flirty Fishy Sorcerer of the HADB |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Elite Waterdeep Guard
![]() Join Date: October 17, 2001
Location: Hollis, New York, USA
Posts: 11
|
Ya. I got that part. I wrote it in my message. Now let me give you my example:
1) If my THAC0 is 7 and your AC is 3 then I have to roll a 4 or higher on a 20 sided die to do damage. (From the formula THAC0-AC= what I must roll to do damage.) 2) If my THAC0 is 2 and your AC is -1 now I have to roll a 3 or higher to do damage. (From the formula THAC0-AC= what I must roll to do damage.) That's crazy! You have a BETTER AC yet it is EASIER to do you damage. That is because of the lower THAC0. I think I have just figured out that THAC0 is easily just as important as AC. A revelation to me although probably not to many of you. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Elite Waterdeep Guard
![]() Join Date: October 15, 2001
Location: Manchester
Posts: 11
|
no if you had a thaco 0f 19 and you trying to injure a -1 then youd need to roll a 20 i have a character with -11 but they still can be hit as a roll of 20 is always a hit and likewise a roll of a 1 is always a fail meaning you cant be invincible (without cheating of course) itd be a bit too easy if you could dont you think. i know what you mean though cos i found it strange at first!
------------------ "The day shall come when you will finally know and understand me, but untill that day you will live only a myth. Never forget that for you must always wait in fear!" |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Dracolisk
![]() Join Date: September 16, 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 47
Posts: 6,901
|
Baldur's Gate uses the AD&D 2nd Edition rules, which I agree can be quite confusing in the matter of AC and THAC0. The 3rd edition changes those number systems around, so that the higher the number, the better it is. MUCH less confusing that way.
------------------ Boots of Stealth: 1125 gp Shadow Armor: 7875 gp Slipping an Oil of Firey Burning down the back of Sarevok's armor: Priceless |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Elite Waterdeep Guard
![]() Join Date: October 17, 2001
Location: Hollis, New York, USA
Posts: 11
|
Six,
Which number do they change around in the 3rd? I would assume AC stays the same (the lower the better) so you must mean THAC0. But that doesn't make sense either. Now if my THAC0 is 15 and I am trying to hit someone with an AC of 5 then I must roll a 10. But if my THAC0 is 17 (which you say is the better THAC0 in 3rd edition) and I am attacking a guy with an AC of 5, now I have to roll a 12 or higher. That definitely doesn't make sense. My THAC0 got better and his AC stayed the same yet it is harder to hit him. I AM SO LOST WITH THIS. I NEED A MATHEMATICIAN. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Dracolisk
![]() Join Date: September 16, 2001
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 47
Posts: 6,901
|
Don't worry too much about it, Radagast.
![]() ![]() I'm told that in the 3rd Edition rules, BOTH numbers were changed around; a positive AC is good, and a positive THAC0 is good. Don't ask me for any formulas, though. ------------------ Boots of Stealth: 1125 gp Shadow Armor: 7875 gp Slipping an Oil of Firey Burning down the back of Sarevok's armor: Priceless |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Zhentarim Guard
![]() Join Date: October 10, 2001
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Posts: 335
|
In the 3rd Edition the system has been totally changed. Yo now get an attack modifier or bonus (depends on class and stats), which you add to the roll of one d20. If this value is higher than the AC of your opponent, you hit him.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
THAC0 | Irie word of Jah | Baldurs Gate II: Shadows of Amn & Throne of Bhaal | 7 | 11-10-2003 07:11 PM |
THAC0? | Malavon's Rage | Icewind Dale | Heart of Winter | Icewind Dale II Forum | 4 | 12-25-2002 05:02 AM |
THAC0 and AC | Calerian | Baldurs Gate II: Shadows of Amn & Throne of Bhaal | 10 | 01-08-2002 03:22 PM |
About Thac0 | )V(ajin l3uu | Baldurs Gate & Tales of the Sword Coast | 4 | 12-02-2001 09:43 PM |
A THAC0 of -235! | Avatar | Icewind Dale | Heart of Winter | Icewind Dale II Forum | 4 | 06-03-2001 09:05 AM |