Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

feedburner count

Converting from Descending AC to Ascending AC

Labels: , , ,

I'm trying to add a section on converting from the descending AC used in older editions to the ascending AC used in Microlite74 for the section on "0e Conventions" section in the Microlite74 rules. Here's what I've come up with. It's easy to do the conversion, but I seem to be having trouble writing it in a concise, clear way. Here's what I have. Suggested improvements are welcome. I've been working on this for 24 hours and only making it worse.

Descending Armor Class: 0e and other pre SRD editions used a descending Armor Class system where an unarmored character was AC 9 (AC 10 in some editions) and better armor used lower numbers (e.g. AC 5 was Chain, AC 2 was plate). Magic armor could even have a negative armor class. Microlite74 uses the ascending Armor Class system used in the OGL SRD. If have old adventures using the original descending AC system and wish to use them, it is easy to convert descending ACs to ascending ACs.

Unarmored AC is 9: If the adventure is for 0e (or other edition where the unarmored AC is 9), simply subtract the descending AC listed in the adventure from 19 to get the ascending AC used by Microlite74.

Unarmored AC is 10: If the adventure is for 1e or 2e (where the unarmored AC is 10), subtract the descending AC listed in the adventure from 20 to obtain the ascending AC used by Microlite74

Brian Blakley said...
August 23, 2011 at 9:04 AM  

Hi Randall,

Your write-up seems straight forward to me. I had my 12 year old daughter (who has no rpg experience) read it also, and she understood it easily as well.

Of course she did mention that you need to put a "you" in the sentence "If_have old adventures".
I didn't catch that myself at first. Ah, the gift of young eyes, they are the best editors. ;)

Randall said...
August 23, 2011 at 11:58 AM  

@Brian: Perhaps it isn't so bad, to me it just seems like a lot of words to explain a simple concept.

Please thank your daughter for catching the word omission for me. I've corrected it in rules.

Brian Blakley said...
August 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM  

@Randall: I think it is a very simplified, and concise explanation. Younger people like my daughter, or people new to rpgs should have no problem grasping what you wrote. I don't think you could edit it too much more without losing necessary information, or making it less easy to understand.

The funny thing is “modern” game systems would spend a whole page or so to convey the same information. :)

Timeshadows said...
August 23, 2011 at 1:18 PM  

Just as you have written it, sir.
--It is just fine, and very accommodating to have phrased it both ways.


Brawnfet.Nos said...
August 29, 2011 at 12:41 PM  

This seems to be an extra rule that doesn't accomplish it's stated goal. In both advanced and original AC games, straight plate has AC3, and chain has 5. The only difference is unarmored and unarmored with shield. This rule would actually give most original characters/monsters a much lower ac than they should.

Post a Comment

Post a Comment