Player attack tables vs Moldvay/Cook/Marsh; thoughts?

[jrodman]

I just noticed, a couple of months into my biweekly campaign, that the attack bonuses for Labyrinth Lord are a fair bit different from Moldvay/Marsh/Cook.

In Moldvay, starts at thaco 19. Fighters (&elves dwarves etc) progress:
4: 17
7: 14
10: 12
13: 10

Clerics & Thieves use the same values, but progress at 5, 9, 13, and 17. eg
5: 17
9: 14
13: 12
17: 10

Magic users are same again, but progress at 6, 11, 16, and 21, eg
6: 17
11: 14
16: 12
21: 10


LL seems a bit more like AD&D, with much more frequent steppings.

Everyone again starts at thac0 19, or attack bonus 1 if you prefer.
Fighters, elves, etc progress...
3: 18
4: 17
5: 16
6: 15
7: 14
9: 13
10: 12
12: 11
13: 10

So I guess It's really the same progression but "smoothed". I guess I prefer the LL table.

Similarly clerics & thieves are:
4: 18
6: 17
9: 16
then a strangely fast advancement..
10: 15
11: 14
12: 13
13: 12

This time there are some interesting aliasing effects with 6 being behind and a quick set of jumps around 10. But all in all it's similar to the materiel, I just didn't realize how they stepped differently until I started writing this post.

[bighara]

As I understand it, Dan made some deliberate textual differences in the mechanics to stay safely out of infringement territory.

[kipper]

Yes, I had noticed this change as well.

Overall (considering levels up to 14), LL Fighters have improved attacks (at levels 3,5,6,9,12,14), whereas LL Clerics/Thieves/MU are generally the same or worse off (especially at higher levels).

I have made my own 'smoothed' tables which I use, more in line with average BX values. (I did the same for saves too).