Terminology - adjDX

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

The TFT rules were written in an informal, almost conversational style. This compared quite favorably with the ponderous, pseudo-scholarly style that Gygax favored in the DMG and PH.

However, I wonder if the adjDX language needs to be revisited.

My problem is that it isn't always clear whether a particular DX modifier actually affects adjDX (i.e., strike order)... In other words, which DX modifiers affect strike order - what I'll call adjDX - and which ones don't?

Note - AM does state that range modifiers for missile weapons don't affect DX order.

Right or Wrong - I never played it that way. The adjDX for the order-of-attacks was factored one way, and the adjDX to-hit was factored another way; HOWEVER, the rules don't actually inform you to play it that way.

Now that you point it out, it is ambiguous on this point. The rules state that the only exceptions to order-of-attack are Pole Weapon Charges/Charging, and 2nd Arrow fired in one turn.

Also consider this, in some cases a figure may have an adjDX of 12 when attacking one figure, and an adjDX of 10 when attacking another due to circumstances like elevation or something. So does your figure attack later because his opponent happens to be standing on a chest???, but attacks sooner against the opponent standing in a 3' hole???

That's why I factor the order-of-attack, and, the to-hit separately -- BUT THAT IS JUST ME.

So, yes, a bit of finer talk would be most welcome I think.

JK