BG2: To Hit versus THAC0

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

Hi Group,

I have read that the upgraded Mace Of Disruption is THAC0 +2, yet To Hit +5.
Oddly, the MoD's description doesn't detail this. Additionally, the 'To Hit'
attribute is actually what's implied when a creature requires a +3 weapon to
be able to hit it, not its THAC0. In which casem it doesn't make sense not
to tell the player what the 'To Hit' of a weapon is, does it?

Is there a list anywhere of all weapons and their 'To Hit'. Or even just a
list of weapons where their 'To Hit' is different to their THAC0's.

Thanks all.

Elliot

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"Elliot J" <elliot.xxx@xxx.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Tqwqc.38642$c%6.16812@pathologist.blueyonder.net...
> Hi Group,
>
> I have read that the upgraded Mace Of Disruption is THAC0 +2, yet To Hit
+5.
> Oddly, the MoD's description doesn't detail this. Additionally, the 'To
Hit'
> attribute is actually what's implied when a creature requires a +3 weapon
to
> be able to hit it, not its THAC0. In which casem it doesn't make sense not
> to tell the player what the 'To Hit' of a weapon is, does it?

RCV: Actually the description should say this, it does in my game.
Basically, while the Mace has a +2 THAC0, it is considered to be +5 for what
it CAN hit. So while it can hit things/people that require +3, +4 or +5 to
hit, it still only grants you the +2 to your roll. There are a couple of
other weapons like this, which can hit more than their base (+#) would seem
to allow. Which they are, I don't have on hand.... :-(

Rich

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"Rich C. Velay" <RCVelay@remove.this.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:z4yqc.528985$Ig.236089@pd7tw2no...
>
> RCV: Actually the description should say this, it does in my game.
> Basically, while the Mace has a +2 THAC0, it is considered to be +5 for
what
> it CAN hit. So while it can hit things/people that require +3, +4 or +5
to
> hit, it still only grants you the +2 to your roll. There are a couple of
> other weapons like this, which can hit more than their base (+#) would
seem
> to allow. Which they are, I don't have on hand.... :-(
>

RCV: Another weapon like this is the Sword of Flame [from the Druid
Grove]. Although the description lists a floating scale of THAC0
enhancements vs. various types of creatures, it is always considered +4 for
what it can hit. Versus most things, it will be just a +1 sword, but it can
hit anything up to +4, even if it is actually only granting you a +1 to
hit.....

Rich

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"Rich C. Velay" <RCVelay@remove.this.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news😛0Aqc.528650$oR5.32669@pd7tw3no...
>
> RCV: Another weapon like this is the Sword of Flame [from the Druid
> Grove]. Although the description lists a floating scale of THAC0
> enhancements vs. various types of creatures, it is always considered +4
for
> what it can hit. Versus most things, it will be just a +1 sword, but it
can
> hit anything up to +4, even if it is actually only granting you a +1 to
> hit.....
>
RCV: Remembered another one, the Bone Club. Considered +3 for what it
can hit, even though it only usually gets a +2 - I think the +3 THAC0 only
applies to Undead, but is always considered +3 for what it will effect.

Rich

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

>> RCV: Another weapon like this is the Sword of Flame [from the Druid
>> Grove]. Although the description lists a floating scale of THAC0
>> enhancements vs. various types of creatures, it is always considered +4
>for
>> what it can hit. Versus most things, it will be just a +1 sword, but it
>can
>> hit anything up to +4, even if it is actually only granting you a +1 to
>> hit.....
>>
> RCV: Remembered another one, the Bone Club. Considered +3 for what it
>can hit, even though it only usually gets a +2 - I think the +3 THAC0 only
>applies to Undead, but is always considered +3 for what it will effect.

The naff Equaliser is the oposite. It can be +4 (or 3 max?) to hit
iirc, but only +2 enchantment?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"Trickle" <false@quiteclearelyfake.tz> wrote in message
news:ndima0hfknp3r6nhohdd8dncbu9hgn603b@4ax.com...
>
> >> RCV: Another weapon like this is the Sword of Flame [from the Druid
> >> Grove]. Although the description lists a floating scale of THAC0
> >> enhancements vs. various types of creatures, it is always considered +4
> >for
> >> what it can hit. Versus most things, it will be just a +1 sword, but
it
> >can
> >> hit anything up to +4, even if it is actually only granting you a +1 to
> >> hit.....
> >>
> > RCV: Remembered another one, the Bone Club. Considered +3 for what
it
> >can hit, even though it only usually gets a +2 - I think the +3 THAC0
only
> >applies to Undead, but is always considered +3 for what it will effect.
>
> The naff Equaliser is the oposite. It can be +4 (or 3 max?) to hit
> iirc, but only +2 enchantment?

RCV: No its the same sort of weapon - the actual to hit modifier changes
based on what you are swinging at, but it is always considered +3 for what
it can hit. So it can hit an Iron Golem [+3 needed] even though it won't
give you that +3 as a THAC0 modifier since the Iron Golem is the wrong
alignment to give such a modifier.

Oh and another one, I think. The +1/+4 Hammer vs Giantkin. It is
always considered +4 for what it can hit, even though it only gives a +1
versus most enemies. A very effective anti-Golem weapon since it is blunt,
thus affecting Clay Golems as well.

Rich