tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post3043182743075091928..comments2020-04-04T02:30:22.618-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: More Missile ModelingDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-92109118930587576752019-07-29T10:25:34.194-04:002019-07-29T10:25:34.194-04:00Yeah, either way you slice it that will be two ari...Yeah, either way you slice it that will be two arithmetic operations versus my current single division. Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-14396829730660066882019-07-28T23:47:12.934-04:002019-07-28T23:47:12.934-04:00I suppose one could accomplish that de facto by ad...I suppose one could accomplish that de facto by adding a bonus for shooting at point-blank, so that the modifier is ±0 once you hit 30', but that sounds like a terribly complication, and I don't even want to imagine trying to model the difference between trying to hit someone with a sword stroke vs. a bow shot at 5' away.John Higginshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06522143715905888511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-79306994667876836482019-07-28T11:09:24.383-04:002019-07-28T11:09:24.383-04:00That's pretty reasonable, thanks for sharing t...That's pretty reasonable, thanks for sharing that. When I wrote this blog post, my first instinct was also to have the first 30' without penalty. But I switched to a flat -1/10 feet so there's only one arithmetic step (instead of two) in the calculation and explanation. Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-56933237249044020802019-07-28T01:22:29.452-04:002019-07-28T01:22:29.452-04:00This is interesting. I had already been thinking t...This is interesting. I had already been thinking that in order to model missiles more realistically, there should be no penalty for any missile within 30' or so, and a smooth dropoff beyond that. I really wanted to get rid of the jarring "range categories" (I have too many longbowmen in my D&D games who are always trying to position themselves -exactly seventy feet away- from the biggest baddest baddie on the battlefield; it's annoying.)<br /><br />What I'd come up with was this:<br /><br />- No penalty for any missile out to 30'. 30' is the maximum effective range for most hand-hurled missiles (knives/daggers, shuriken, clubs, hatchets, spears/tridents, grenades, whatever).<br />- Javelins/pila and darts/plumbata can be hurled out to 60', at −1 to hit per 5' beyond 30'.<br />- Bows/crossbows, slings, atlatl, and smooth-bore muskets can shoot out to 90', at −1 per 10' beyond 30'.<br />- Rifle-bore muskets can shoot effectively out to 150' at −1 per 20' beyond the 30' mark. Other guns (pistol, harquebus, blunderbuss, whatever) use one of the weaker range increments (either "as dagger" or "as javelin").John Higginshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06522143715905888511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-52740578332482501992019-03-10T10:58:45.798-04:002019-03-10T10:58:45.798-04:00I agree, that's essentially it. (Note for non-...I agree, that's essentially it. (Note for non-fighters you're subtracting a fraction of the level, like maybe half the wizard level or three-quarters the cleric level). <br /><br />The other thing about THACO is that traditionally people keep a full table of possible ACs on the PC sheet, subtracting the given AC in each case. Then any time they get a bonus they subtract that from the THACO -- so the idea really puts you on the path to subtracting all bonuses all the time (instead of directly adding to the die roll). Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-45066110840835695502019-03-08T18:11:24.509-05:002019-03-08T18:11:24.509-05:00[New comment 'cuz I forgot a few lines]
Oh! S...[New comment 'cuz I forgot a few lines]<br /><br />Oh! So it is just "Target (20 minus PC's level)".<br />Easy peasy.<br />I've already explained Target 20 for the newer table, so I will stick to it.<br />But for the older table (running the godawful THAC0 we all know) I will explain this "Target THAC0" system and try to buy them into it.<br />Thank you Scott and Daniel for your patience and collaboration.Igor Livramentohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02573014189087408962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-41105431678375297722019-03-06T07:29:33.167-05:002019-03-06T07:29:33.167-05:00This ↑
And "rulebooks have often explained i...This ↑<br /><br />And "rulebooks have often explained it poorly" can't be overstated. Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11109361392288271963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-35035121085000696752019-03-06T00:54:16.667-05:002019-03-06T00:54:16.667-05:00Really it's simply the way THAC0 has always wo...Really it's simply the way THAC0 has always worked, though rulebooks have often explained it poorly. The idea is that as you level, instead of gaining a bonus to attack rolls, you lower your target number. So at THAC0 20 your roll on a d20 + target's AC + any bonuses or penalties must equal or exceed 20. At THAC0 19 they must be ≥19, etc. The level bonus is just pre-subtracted from the target number instead of adding it to each roll individually.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14285793254382192231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-39570493783559549132019-03-05T20:56:07.903-05:002019-03-05T20:56:07.903-05:00If Scott Keeney ever sees this comment, could you ...If Scott Keeney ever sees this comment, could you please explain in full detail how this "target 19, 16, …" system derived from THAC0 works?<br />Thank you two in advance.<br />I will be making a Blogspot for "Smasher & Devourer".<br />And I plan on translating my ruleset to english eventually.<br />So far, so good.<br />Cheers!Igor Livramentohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02573014189087408962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-87231735496609363992019-03-05T09:25:30.563-05:002019-03-05T09:25:30.563-05:00Igor and Scott: Thanks so much for the kind words!...Igor and Scott: Thanks so much for the kind words! I agree, Igor's game sounds excellent, I'd love to see his custom rules too, and so glad you're using Target 20. :-)Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-31945019191868993402019-03-05T09:24:06.895-05:002019-03-05T09:24:06.895-05:00That's a fair point, actually.That's a fair point, actually.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-25188686518268031222019-03-05T08:38:25.271-05:002019-03-05T08:38:25.271-05:00Your games sound fun! (Would like to see that rule...Your games sound fun! (Would like to see that ruleset.)<br /><br />I think THAC0 is great, too, if you cut the subtraction and treat it instead like Target 20, i.e., so it's just target 19, target 16, etc. It then even has a little less math at the table as you don't have to add in a level attack bonus. (That said, there's simply no beating Target20 for monsters.)<br /><br />Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11109361392288271963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-83302870997846106572019-03-04T23:25:52.219-05:002019-03-04T23:25:52.219-05:00Amazing stuff!
If you did not explain at the end, ...Amazing stuff!<br />If you did not explain at the end, I would be completely lost (undergrad in literary studies and linguistics, no maths, even if I did one semester of physics, never really got past the first few exams).<br />So thank you once more for this enlightening and inspiring blog.<br />Your "official house rules" (OED) have inspired me to (re)write my ruleset (titled: "Smasher & Devourer", naming two of its most fearsome monsters) excluding the 'Healer' class and applying a progressive penalty per distance for missile attacks.<br />And, obviously, I am using Target 20.<br />This will be run on a second table (the first one we discussed on your post about best algorithms is still stuck with THAC0).<br />This new table loved the cleric-less setting and seem passionate about how easy T20 is.<br />So, once more, cheers from Brazil.<br />And keep up the great work.Igor Livramentohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02573014189087408962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-65261000056684006692019-03-04T19:27:50.612-05:002019-03-04T19:27:50.612-05:00Interesting how all the time, it keeps looking mor...Interesting how all the time, it keeps looking more and more ranged hit probabilities would be most elegant when using dungeon tiles or battle mats with squares of 3 1/3 feet (or 1 meter or 1 yard, if easy approximations are preferred). That would then let you say that 'short range' is within 10 squares, accuracy suffers a -1 penalty for every 2 squares beyond that (as -5% every 6 2/3 feet is equivalent to -7.5% every 10 feet), and thrown weapons have a maximum range of 20 squares.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14285793254382192231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-26920092511154530752019-03-04T18:33:34.808-05:002019-03-04T18:33:34.808-05:00You're right, and I've totally wavered on ...You're right, and I've totally wavered on the fence of that in exactly the same way. I went with the flat -1/10' for simplicity. Having it staggered at 30' (so, subtract then divide) seemed like something I was very likely to forget about, or hard to explain, in-game. <br /><br />In some sense that quasi-balances out with being generous in rounding down from 7.5% to 5% per ten feet. E.g., up at 40 yds = 120 ft, the chart suggests it should be -70%, and we're only penalizing -12/20 = -60%, so still overall biased to generosity to the shooter.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-35238359676959300062019-03-04T12:04:29.577-05:002019-03-04T12:04:29.577-05:00So in looking at this data chart, it looks like a ...So in looking at this data chart, it looks like a penalty to hit doesn't really kick in until 10yards/30feet (If I am understanding it correctly)<br />Since in my own games, I tend to focus on "in dungeon" use of weapons, I might wave penalties for the first 30 feet, or in some way reserve those penalties for "field" use.... <br />Not sure.<br />Baquieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08357103428591599364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-17344329032511676392019-03-04T10:58:34.879-05:002019-03-04T10:58:34.879-05:00Oddly, on the car ride in this morning I was askin...Oddly, on the car ride in this morning I was asking myself "wonder if Delta has any research/thoughts on using ranged weapons on adjacent/close range foes." Point blank shot, as it were....Baquieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08357103428591599364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-87292799749960732162019-03-04T10:44:16.714-05:002019-03-04T10:44:16.714-05:00Good point: I would definitely round penalty down,...Good point: I would definitely round penalty down, so at 8 feet I'd say +0. Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-44029665707962942122019-03-04T08:50:21.998-05:002019-03-04T08:50:21.998-05:00Just a tclarification... The first −1 chance to hi...Just a tclarification... The first −1 chance to hit is after each 10 feet? I mean, shooting at someone at 8 feet has +0 or -1 chance to hit?G. B. Verashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07321019711309446662noreply@blogger.com