Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

an interesting concept but we would need more then just a d10 system we would need to practically rewrite the way we use things like statlines or what those statlines even are. and now we are talking about an overhaul that would be a major gamble, it would either fix a ton of things or be worse then what we have now

I've posted before on this; I'm very against switching from d6's.

First, to the people suggesting d100's... then you got to ask yourself why you like 40k in the first place. If you're going for simulation, a computer can do that much better. That's why you can instead play a strategy game like Starcraft or Dawn of War. If you're going for depth of subject matter, then maybe look into playing Dark Millenium or Inquisitor - one of the 40k RPGs. That way you can see clear differences in everything.

Second, to the people saying that D10's are just as easy to pick up and roll and count, there's a concept in psychology called "chunking", where people can just group pieces of information into easy to remember "chunks". It just so happens that people tend to be good at remembering things around the number "7". To me, this is why D6's and D8's feel so natural - they're really close to this number, and our brains are just well adapted to thinking about lots of numbers around them. Being the smaller of the two, 6 is easier for more people to work with, hence why it's the preferred die for so many more games throughout history. The other die types are not new inventions, and the dodecahedron (12-sided polygon) was calculated by the Greeks. This stuff ain't new, so you really have to really think as to why the d6 is more popular.

Third, this system, and most "board game" systems, utilize d6's. Why? Look above. But also, you have the weight of momentum on your side. Unless someone's coming from an RPG background, the familiarity with other dice sizes will be limited, meaning that it'll more difficult for them to get on board with the newer sizes. Going with something familiar is useful as a sales tool, which means you're more likely to have more people to play against. Without a community, no game will survive.

And that's my 2 cents.

 ionusx wrote:
an interesting concept but we would need more then just a d10 system we would need to practically rewrite the way we use things like statlines or what those statlines even are. and now we are talking about an overhaul that would be a major gamble, it would either fix a ton of things or be worse then what we have now

It would have to start as a side project until more and more people started to pick it up and prefer it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yarium wrote:
I've posted before on this; I'm very against switching from d6's.

First, to the people suggesting d100's... then you got to ask yourself why you like 40k in the first place. If you're going for simulation, a computer can do that much better. That's why you can instead play a strategy game like Starcraft or Dawn of War. If you're going for depth of subject matter, then maybe look into playing Dark Millenium or Inquisitor - one of the 40k RPGs. That way you can see clear differences in everything.

Second, to the people saying that D10's are just as easy to pick up and roll and count, there's a concept in psychology called "chunking", where people can just group pieces of information into easy to remember "chunks". It just so happens that people tend to be good at remembering things around the number "7". To me, this is why D6's and D8's feel so natural - they're really close to this number, and our brains are just well adapted to thinking about lots of numbers around them. Being the smaller of the two, 6 is easier for more people to work with, hence why it's the preferred die for so many more games throughout history. The other die types are not new inventions, and the dodecahedron (12-sided polygon) was calculated by the Greeks. This stuff ain't new, so you really have to really think as to why the d6 is more popular.

Third, this system, and most "board game" systems, utilize d6's. Why? Look above. But also, you have the weight of momentum on your side. Unless someone's coming from an RPG background, the familiarity with other dice sizes will be limited, meaning that it'll more difficult for them to get on board with the newer sizes. Going with something familiar is useful as a sales tool, which means you're more likely to have more people to play against. Without a community, no game will survive.

And that's my 2 cents.

If you could keep the social aspect of the game where you still had a bunch of dudes in a room having a few beers and playing games not staring at screens, and you could convert the whole thing into a hologram table like in Star Wars where Chewie was playing weird alien chess with C3PO. Where a computer managed all the game mechanics and you just focused on playing the game. I definitely would prefer that, as you would get more actual game time, no rules disputes etc, you could wire the game stats into a database and GW or some company would actually have some data to use for balancing units as well. You could still customize your army in how it appears on the table, you’d just need to edit your army file.

But holographic gaming tables is the subject of another thread 

D10/D20 allows you to better fit more units into the game and make them play different. You could boost terminators survivability marginally without making them ridiculous. On D6, the jump from one number to the next is too big for this.

As far as humans dealing with 7 numbers better, how about we just evolve our brains instead of just staying at what we’re used to. The human brain is plastic and adapts to change.

But if people had a problem with the dice themselves, GW could easily make a small device/app for cheap that can generate the numbers. You could plug in a unit or weapon code SM01 (tactical squad) plus number of units 10, shooting at unit OK01 (Ork Boyz), GO! (Just a concept, they could make it a lot better than that)

Naaris wrote:

Spoiler:

I think D10 40k would be interesting. I wouldn't say it was metric 40k though. Although moving to D10 might mean moving the measuring system of 40k to metric as well since there are a lot of modifiers in the game that work off of x D6 increments.

The table would have to change from 6x4 to a metric equivalent of the same ratio.

This might be a good move since the game is moving to larger armies and more powerful units that have a bigger foot print, a bigger table may even the playing field.

240CM = 7.8ft. X 160CM=5.2ft. We get the 1 by 2/3 ratio. You could go smaller 180cm=5.9ft. x 120CM=3.9ft. But bigger is probably better.

So Lets say its now a 240x160CM table.
Deployment -
Dawn of War
40CM deployment zones with 80cm down the middle

H&A
80CM depoloyment zones with 80cm down the middle

VS
I hate vanguard strike so I don't know

Distances - Would need to be re-calibrated to make sense on this table.
3" = 5cm
6" = 10cm
9" = 15cm
12" = 20cm
15" = 25cm
18" = 30cm
24" = 40cm
30" =50cm
36" = 60cm
48" = 80cm
60" = 100cm
72" = 120cm

Charge Ranges 2d10?
Tau supporting fire 10cm?
Rolls that are x + D10cm?
Dunestrider - add 5cm?

To simplify things we'd need some new rulers that would measure CM by Decimeter. It is equal to ten centimeters. So measurements could be broken down into .5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12. This way you could simplify the math when doing measurements and even say it faster. "You can charge 1.5" or
"whats the range on that?"
"12."
"Are you fething kidding me!?!?!"

I could keep going but then this becomes a project.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
More to come


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A really interesting next step would be to look at how to change the hit rolls, wound rolls, vehicle dmg, armor rating, pen rolls, Saves, stat lines, psychic powers, melee combat.
The goal would be to do it with no more than 10 d10 dice. That someone would need to roll/own. Some way to group mass shooting attacks.

A big change to going to D10 system is the added bonus of going to a D5 subsystem for lesser rolls. Anything that says roll d6 and one of six results can occur would have that table truncated to 5 outcomes. Simplifies many tables people try to remember. Also lends to a cleaner format where you have 1 to 5 scales for various outcomes. 1 can always be bad, 5 is some kind of boon.

Anyway, On to the Psychic Phase

General change to the psychic phase would be that psykers can choose the powers they want if all the powers are from the same table. Obviously they can only choose as many powers as their ML dictates
If they want to mix and match from different tables then they would roll for those power randomly

Psychic Phase

Mastery Level & and getting pyschic powers off

Psychic Dice Pool
ML for each psyker dictates how many spells they can cast
If all spells chosen are from the same Table you can have the primaris for free. Psykers get an additional charge for free that can only be used on force weapons. And Can get an additional charge for free that can only be used on the primaris powers they know.

Roll D10 + mastery level to get a psychic power off
- 1 dice powers activates on a 7 or higher.

Powers that require multiple dice - Can keep these number and would refer to them as spell level rather than warp charge points.
If a power requires
2 dice - then it requires a 8 or higher _* EDITED
3 dice - then it requires a 9_* EDITED

Perils
You fail to get the spell off roll to peril. Roll d10, take that result and minus the spell requirement (1, 2, 3 dice) then add your ML. If 6 or under you peril.
- This system makes it more realistic in that lower mastery level psykers are at a higher risk of dangerous results casting more difficult spells.

Revised Perils table - Roll to 1d5 and the result occurs
1 Dragged into the Warp
Roll a Leadership test
- Fail- Psyker removed and considered killed and unit suffers D6 S6 AP1 hits.
- Pass - 1 wound/glance with no saves.

2 Mental Purge
- 1 wound/glance with no saves.
- Forget one random power.

3 Power Drain
- 1 wound/glance, armor or invuln saves allowed.
- Psyker cannot cast any more spells / use powers in the current psychic phase - pardon the lingo

4 Psychic Backlash
- 1 wound/glance, armor or invuln saves allowed.

5 Warp Surge
Roll a Leadership test
- Pass - Psyker gains 3+ inv save, Fleshbane, Armourbane, Smash until next friendly psychic phase.
- Fail - 1 wound/glance, armor or invuln saves allowed.

Deny the Witch
If a spell is successfully cast, the opposing player can deny the witch.

Roll D10 - Witch is denied on a roll of 10 or more.
Add to the roll if -
- +1 if the target is a Psyker.
- +1 if the target has higher mastery level than the caster.
- +1 if the target has Adamantium Will.

Nice work Naaris.

Isn't there anyone who wants to try out a D10 system?

A d6 simplifies down to d3 (1-2 / 3-4 / 5-6), which is an even smarter table to work with.

It also simplifies to a d2 (1-3 / 4-6), which is super easy!

d2 Perils of the Warp:
1) Warp Implosion! - roll a d2 for Ld:
- Pass (1) - Pskyer suffers 1 wound that ignores armor and cover saves, and may not cast more spells this turn.
- Fail! (2) - center a Large (5") Blast template over the Caster and remove all models wholly or partially under the template; superheavies / Gargantuan Creatures suffer d6+6 Hull Point / Wounds with no saves permitted.

2) Warp Surge! - roll a d2 for Ld:
- Pass (1) - Psyker automatically successfully casts any known spell at no cost; this spell cannot be countered.
- Fail! (2) - Pskyer suffers 1 wound that ignores armor and cover saves, and may not cast more spells this turn.

Simple, right?

So basically you want Fantasy 8th edition level Perils, powers, and casting?

I'm all for taking their generation though. Roll a bunch of dice on a table and any doubles are powers you can pick freely instead of re-rolling for another random one.

Which by the way works a lot better with a d6.

Why not go full D20? Dice are easy to procure for needing to spam rolls, and it will add a bunch of detail.

I want a D10 based system that completely rewrites many mechanisms. My idea would be that AP would be retained, but matching armor save with AP only halves (rounded up the save). For example, 4+ armor hit by and AP 4 weapon would be still save on a 7+. Cover would deduct from to-hit rolls, not provide an additional armor save.

 Arkaine wrote:
So basically you want Fantasy 8th edition level Perils, powers, and casting?

No, I do not.. WFB7/8 made 40k Psyker stuff way too complicated for my tastes. I do not like the current 40k6/7 Psyker stuff. We do not need 7+ powers and so forth. 2 or 3 good ones would be enough, ignoring all of the filler. I think that moving to d2/d3 or Thorpian d3 (1, 2-5, 6) would be far better.

I believe that the d6 is plenty enough. d20 is somewhat worse, but acceptable for high detail. d8, d10 and d12 are flat out bad ideas. Xd6 mechanisms are the worst and should be removed entirely.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
So basically you want Fantasy 8th edition level Perils, powers, and casting?

No, I do not.. WFB7/8 made 40k Psyker stuff way too complicated for my tastes. I do not like the current 40k6/7 Psyker stuff. We do not need 7+ powers and so forth. 2 or 3 good ones would be enough, ignoring all of the filler. I think that moving to d2/d3 or Thorpian d3 (1, 2-5, 6) would be far better.

I believe that the d6 is plenty enough. d20 is somewhat worse, but acceptable for high detail. d8, d10 and d12 are flat out bad ideas. Xd6 mechanisms are the worst and should be removed entirely.

Bell curves are actually an excellent mathematical model to build games around. Modifiers can be smaller and fewer and still have a huge impact. My opinion is pretty much the exact opposite of yours on this. D6 is the absolute worst. Why else would GW use it?

While Xd6 is fine if a computer is doing the sums, it fails for human work because you cannot simply glance accurate results - people need to stop and add. And if the total is more than 10, it's even slower. For basically no benefit. Don't believe me, go play Sedition Wars until you've learned your lesson.

And that presumes that bells are necessary or desirable. That's debatable when straight d6 rolls scale, and start to form a bell when rolled in sequence, or en masse.

Finally, a Thorpian die [0-1-1-2-2-3] gives a perfectly reasonable approximation of a bell, with the ease of manufacture of a regular d6. If I were making a game from scratch, you bet I'd be using Thorpian dice!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
While Xd6 is fine if a computer is doing the sums, it fails for human work because you cannot simply glance accurate results - people need to stop and add. And if the total is more than 10, it's even slower. For basically no benefit. Don't believe me, go play Sedition Wars until you've learned your lesson.

And that presumes that bells are necessary or desirable. That's debatable when straight d6 rolls scale, and start to form a bell when rolled in sequence, or en masse.

Finally, a Thorpian die [0-1-1-2-2-3] gives a perfectly reasonable approximation of a bell, with the ease of manufacture of a regular d6. If I were making a game from scratch, you bet I'd be using Thorpian dice!

While that's true, it still doesn't provide enough granularity on the individual units. You are still rather limited in the curves you can form. I'd keep the general 40K math setup, but using a D10 provides the statistical space for the large variety of units.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
While Xd6 is fine if a computer is doing the sums, it fails for human work because you cannot simply glance accurate results - people need to stop and add. And if the total is more than 10, it's even slower. For basically no benefit. Don't believe me, go play Sedition Wars until you've learned your lesson.

And that presumes that bells are necessary or desirable. That's debatable when straight d6 rolls scale, and start to form a bell when rolled in sequence, or en masse.

Finally, a Thorpian die [0-1-1-2-2-3] gives a perfectly reasonable approximation of a bell, with the ease of manufacture of a regular d6. If I were making a game from scratch, you bet I'd be using Thorpian dice!

This is why I'd prefer the adoption of a D20, especially if we absolute must have random tables. Either you can just limit the tables to 20 items so you make one roll, or you just roll a D20, ten or less it's table one, eleven or more it's table two. Then you roll for one of those twenty items.

Martel732 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
And that presumes that bells are necessary or desirable. That's debatable when straight d6 rolls scale, and start to form a bell when rolled in sequence, or en masse.

Finally, a Thorpian die [0-1-1-2-2-3] gives a perfectly reasonable approximation of a bell, with the ease of manufacture of a regular d6. If I were making a game from scratch, you bet I'd be using Thorpian dice!

While that's true, it still doesn't provide enough granularity on the individual units.

You are still rather limited in the curves you can form.

I'd keep the general 40K math setup, but using a D10 provides the statistical space for the large variety of units.

Suppose it's like this: 1+ to hit for Elites, 2+ to hit for Veteran, 3+ for Rookie; 1+ to wound for Strong, 2+ for Regular, 3+ for Weak. That's a 3x3 matrix to differentiate things. Guard can be Rookie Weak. Space Marines are Veteran Regular. Bloodthirsters are Elite Strong. Compared to 40k, I have better differentiation in the To-Hit *and* the To-Wound in a smaller number space. But getting back to the necessity / desirability question: Why do we need finely-grained curves in what purports to be a relatively simple game, rather than a complex statistical simulation?

As for the curves it forms, if you roll 2 or 3 of them in sequence, with some number in parallel, you get a truer bell curve faster than you would with a d6 or d10.

If you're really looking to do stats & simulation, why aren't you starting with d20s instead of d10s, as Wyzilla asks? (for me, the answer is simple: because I don't like want intermediate tables in my game, when I can just give a target number).

40K is anything but simple.

Then follow the logic of your statements and convert to d20, not d10...

You guys know how much money would have to be spent to buy enough d10's for say Orks or Tau? Its super expensive

Compared to buying a new (Superheavy) model for either?

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
You guys know how much money would have to be spent to buy enough d10's for say Orks or Tau? Its super expensive

You have sets of 10 D10 dice for less than 3$ on eBay, worldwide shipping included.

I have sets of d20s for free having played D&D and Infinity for years.

 MeanAss_Demasoni wrote:
Do you think that basing the game on common 6 sided dice puts constraints on a game with the level of complexity that 40k has?

Absolutely agree. Being limited to incraments of 16.66% is far too constraining.

I'm dabbling with a D10 system in my free time (not quite a direct rules translation of 40k except where stats are concerned). And I'm even considering D20 for the sake of precision. It would slow the game, but not drastically. After all throwing a handful of dice is throwing a handful of dice..

The idea of going to d10 is that it is better in for game balance. I don't think that can be argued against. Note that Games Workshop would still make terribly balanced rules so it probably won't matter.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
You guys know how much money would have to be spent to buy enough d10's for say Orks or Tau? Its super expensive

Not really, I have about 20 I use for my DH heresy games (well 10 sets of percentile dice, but it's the same thing) and I haven't noticed any major cost to me. And were always having to share dice, so I've been thinking about getting another 20 or so. That'd be about $10, not expensive at all. Especialy when you consider hoe expensive everything else in this game is. And we might even see a price drop if a gaming giant like GW started using them a lot.

Colehkxix wrote:
The idea of going to d10 is that it is better in for game balance. I don't think that can be argued against. Note that Games Workshop would still make terribly balanced rules so it probably won't matter.

Balance and granularity aren't necessarily correlated, but in this case, it would help since we can now make space marines very distinct from aspect warriors.

Martel732 wrote:

Colehkxix wrote:
The idea of going to d10 is that it is better in for game balance. I don't think that can be argued against. Note that Games Workshop would still make terribly balanced rules so it probably won't matter.

Balance and granularity aren't necessarily correlated, but in this case, it would help since we can now make space marines very distinct from aspect warriors.

Why is that, in particular, important?

Colehkxix wrote:
The idea of going to d10 is that it is better in for game balance

That is a crock. Switching from d6 to to d10 won't fix any aspect of game balance, as the imbalances tie to mechanics of movement vs shooting, and points costing. And esp. stat assignment. And it definitely doesn't resolve Special Rules.

d10 won't address the [Grot] - Conscript - Guardsman - Veteran - Stormtrooper - Sister of Battle - [Aspect Warrior] situation granularity, either, because you still need to have room for Nurglings and Rippers at the bottom, C'Tan / Avatars / Bloodthirsters at the top.

What d10 will do is force the designer to create minor distinctions based on splitting hairs for the sake of splitting hairs. And if going that route, a d20 is vastly "better", as it gives 10 potentially usable slots in the desired 50% range of variation vs the 5 on a d10 and 3 on a d6. And then there's the issue of dealing with exceptions for Criticals. DnD does Crit 20, but it also has Crit 19+ and Crit 18+ for some weapons, where all of these are easily covered under a Thorpian 6.

But you want to say that d10 fixes balance, show us how.

Great idea but GW would make orks use patented d9s and eldar use d11s.

This thread was fairly funny to me as our group really started to get frustrated with 40k and had moved onto Warmahordes. I can't catch a break playing Warmahordes. For some reason one of the d6 comes up 1 every roll. We all think it should be improbable but for a year now game after game same thing. So I started my own set of rules using D10s and created a method to make whatever models you want. I like Tyranids and want to play them, My friend loves his Legion, another friend loves Tau. So hopefully we all can win.

Go for it! Can't wait to see the Chaos Boon Table, now with almost 100 possible effects to apply.