Would You Play 40k if d6's Were No Longer Used?

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.

**EviscerationPlague**

Karol wrote:
EviscerationPlague 807707 11457129 wrote:
I think this is the most important thing to tackle on this hypothetical D12 discussion.

Even if it was just a direct translation like that, the potential variation of BS stats and other modifiers would still make it less impactiful in the long run. You'd just have to be slightly creative with it is all.

Plus the +/- wouldn't have to be capped. Maybe a sneaky ranger if he wounds/kills a model in a unit makes the unit to something on -1. But if you get hit by some demon/tyranid monster gun, that makes you explode and spill out little griblis your unit members have to kill, you get a -2 or more. Maybe getting hit over and over by corrosive attacks steadily makes you easier to wound, even if the weapon itself isn't as inititaly deadly to someone in a full closed aka more armoured suit. Maybe tank commanders who just took damage from a melt bomb are more weary of shoting something 100m away, and more intersted in killing that thing that just blew their ablative armour, making shoting at further targets less enticing. At the same time the same commander in another situation when infantry is near by, knows he can count of his battle brothers dealing with the meltabomb bearer. Having an "apothecary" could make your troops have a higher morale, and not run as easy. Some because they would hope to be patched up, others because they were 100% sure they do not want to be anywhere near the Dok. More granular rules would also make playing smaller points more fun or at least less one sided. There would be more stuff to do, blood ax could be better in a sneaky situation, then some goffs. A d6 based system is horribly limiting, or at least I came to the conclusion after seeing a few other system. I could be wrong and they all could be just as bad.

Bingo, and we can get rid of "Can only be hit/wounded on a 4+" that is present in the game.

**Boosykes**

Well it's pretty clear most wouldn't mind one bit. And it would give GW a chance to sell all new fancy dice sets.

**VladimirHerzog**

ccs wrote:

Yeah, it's a GW game. While you could make a game game that works how you're describing (and I assume there already is one), I'm not going to bet any $ on GW doing that.
So bigger dice won't reduce the # rolled.
And like I said, with GW all you'll get is at least more problems.

we're already deep in hypotheticals... might as well assume a best case scenario

**Just Tony**

Boosykes wrote:
Well it's pretty clear most wouldn't mind one bit. And it would give GW a chance to sell all new fancy dice sets.

On one forum. One that isn't nearly as populous as it used to be. And that's only the ones that bothered to answer. I'd hardly call that "clear".

**JNAProductions**

Just Tony wrote:
Boosykes wrote:
Well it's pretty clear most wouldn't mind one bit. And it would give GW a chance to sell all new fancy dice sets.

On one forum. One that isn't nearly as populous as it used to be. And that's only the ones that bothered to answer. I'd hardly call that "clear".

As far as the evidence shows, even from a biased poll, people wouldn't mind the change. I agree the evidence isn't conclusive or anything, but as far as we can tell, it's not against new dice.
Feel free to gather evidence to the contrary.

**Just Tony**

Why? I've proven my point. SOME people wouldn't mind the change. Even YOUR comment isn't accurate.

**JNAProductions**

Just Tony wrote:
Why? I've proven my point. SOME people wouldn't mind the change. Even YOUR comment isn't accurate.

What point did you prove?

**Just Tony**

That the data wasn't "clear" as the one poster posited.

**catbarf**

I'd be open to playing a 40K that used other dice. Andy Chambers' Starship Troopers system was originally meant to be an iteration on 40K, and it uses a variety of dice types to great effect.

I probably wouldn't play a 40K where the designer concluded the game's problems come from lack of granularity and that bigger dice are the solution.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

I personally hope they just start using D4s. That way every time a guard player has to shoot, it hurts to pick them all up.

**NinthMusketeer**

Karol wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
I don't see how larger dice are going to fix anything when 40k doesn't even utilize the full diversity of the stats they have now. What mythical version of GW is this that doesn't screw up the dynamics of larger dice even harder than they do now?

It is easier to differentiate stuff from each other. Much easier to make a goff boy different from a bad moon when you have a bigger spread of potential succesful checks. Fewer moments when playing marines means you have to play this one specific legion or chapter, because everything else is inferior.
It would also remove the need multiple rolls. right now GW simulates chance of destroying a unit with a multiple layers of rolling, stacking or giving units multiple saves etc. if the dice were d10 or d12, FnP or a stormshield could just be backed in to one roll. Could have just a "to hit" and a "to wound" roll.

Weapons would be more different, and it would be easier to create specialists. A sniper could actualy hit targets better, then the same armies grunt.
Would it make the game perfect? Of course not, but at worse the game would be faster and more diverse.

I understand the concept and it sounds great--I just cannot imagine a picture in which GW (well, the 40k team) doesn't use the extra variables to screw up in extra ways.

**Stormonu**

Nevelon wrote:
I’m a roleplayer of some years. My dice collection has enough mass it could be used to bludgeon someone to death.

Bah, when even light can't escape your dice, we'll talk.

Changing away from D6 would be a step in the right direction to getting me back. Actually caring about rules that actually work though, would more likely bring me back.

**EviscerationPlague**

Another benefit to the D12, in addition to doubling the stats to do more controlled modifiers, is that you can STILL do D6 values, though at a slower rate of course.

**Dysartes**

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Another benefit to the D12, in addition to doubling the stats to do more controlled modifiers, is that you can STILL do D6 values, though at a slower rate of course.

Not to mention d3 and d4, as well - my favourite d4, for a couple of reasons, has 12 sides.

**EviscerationPlague**

Dysartes wrote:
EviscerationPlague wrote:
Another benefit to the D12, in addition to doubling the stats to do more controlled modifiers, is that you can STILL do D6 values, though at a slower rate of course.

Not to mention d3 and d4, as well - my favourite d4, for a couple of reasons, has 12 sides.

Huh, I wasn't even thinking about that.

**Nazrak**

Insectum7 wrote:
Dice changing isn't a sort of game-quitting change, but rolling similar amounts of non D6 dice is going to be more awkward than most people think, imo. It's the wrong move for 40k.

This is the key thing that I always think of when people keep suggesting all 40K's problems would be solved simply by moving to sillier dice. Ease of use and legibility are a thing.

**G00fySmiley**

if they did the switch it could be done well, but i just assume it will be used to give space marines a 3+ save on a D10 and custodes/terminators on a D10. Eldar will probably get a similar treatment while imperial guard and orks witll get a 5+/6+ save on a D4

**Vankraken**

D10 might be better overall for the game design but I don't have any faith in GW actually improving the game with more dice faces. Knowing GW marketing, they would probably make something like 11 sided dice to try and force players to buy their dice all the while claiming it's some sort of Spinal Tap reference.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

Vankraken wrote:
D10 might be better overall for the game design but I don't have any faith in GW actually improving the game with more dice faces. Knowing GW marketing, they would probably make something like 11 sided dice to try and force players to buy their dice all the while claiming it's some sort of Spinal Tap reference.

Quoted for truth. You are 150% right. It's scary.

**Sunny Side Up**

No.

Played plenty of FFG, Infinity, etc.. and such with D10, D20, alternating activation and such..

They are all worse games for it.

Would love to have some Infinity-themed/fluffed game with 40K mechanics though.

**TheBestBucketHead**

Infinity is absolutely not a worse game for its d20, and does not have AA.

**Strg Alt**

I am right now in the process of porting AoW: Planetfall to the Tabletop with a 40K skin. Four factions are planned and units (not models!) make attack rolls with a D100. This means lots of room for "granularity" such as modifiers for speed, cover (various types), size, distance of target and quality of marksmanship. The ruleset will also make use of:

- D4
- D6
- D8
-D10
-D12
-D20

So all a new player needs is a single dice set which encompasses the aforementioned dice types. Another boon is the fact that rolling buckets of dice is no longer a feature of the game.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

I'd honestly be willing to switch from a D6 to a d12, or 2-12, because that would let GW sell twice the crappy dice, and it would allow us to expand the charts for attacks and wounding to a d10 in actuality.

**EviscerationPlague**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'd honestly be willing to switch from a D6 to a d12, or 2-12, because that would let GW sell twice the crappy dice, and it would allow us to expand the charts for attacks and wounding to a d10 in actuality.

2D6 doesn't have good randomness. D12 is the future. Double everything, and you can make tweaks along the way, and we could get super hard to wound vehicles on a 12+ instead of a 6+ to partially appease the people that won't let go of the gakky AV system/vehicle rules of prior editions.

**Gue'vesa Emissary**

EviscerationPlague wrote:
[2D6 doesn't have good randomness. D12 is the future.

That depends on what you mean by "good randomness". In some cases a flat probability distribution is preferred, in some cases you want a normal distribution. Neither is inherently "better" randomness.

**ProfSrlojohn**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
EviscerationPlague wrote:
[2D6 doesn't have good randomness. D12 is the future.

That depends on what you mean by "good randomness". In some cases a flat probability distribution is preferred, in some cases you want a normal distribution. Neither is inherently "better" randomness.

And anyone who's played XCOM knows that a normal distribution curve can be a absolutely horrible feels-bad moment. Especially when, in 40k, the only ways to affect the success threshold is occasional -/+1 to hit and rerolls.

**Karol**

Only hurts, as it is the case of X-com, elite armies. When you blast your opponent with tens of shots per turn a static normal distribution of wound/kill rolls is acceptable.

It maybe works also works for people that play four times a years, and will remember forever that this one time in 4th ed, they killed a lord character with 5 bolters. Not really the case, when you play 3+ games per week. Then any deviation from the avarge is felt very much. People quit armies or even the game when they can't win at least 1/3ed of their games

**Drachii**

I don't really care what type of dice I'm throwing as long as I'm having a good time throwing them.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

As a player of Custodes, I think it should be far easier for me to kill Space marines, in Melee, than it is for them to kill me. I think the Space Marine players feel the same way about imperial Guard. Extended dice ratios would help with that, by my understanding of the math.

**vict0988**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
As a player of Custodes, I think it should be far easier for me to kill Space marines, in Melee, than it is for them to kill me. I think the Space Marine players feel the same way about imperial Guard. Extended dice ratios would help with that, by my understanding of the math.

You're hitting and wounding on 3+, they are saving on 5+. They are hitting on 3+, wounding on 5+ and you're saving on 2+. You also have an extra wound. Seems like D6s are already fulfilling your request. Armour of Contempt has nothing to do with the dice rolled, it's just a BS rule introduced because of power creep and you could have the exact same thing in 10th with D20s.