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.

Welcome to another exciting discussion about Game Design! I am excited that Dakka Dakka has created a nice new sub-forum for us to chat about this fun topic! Thanks Dakka Dakka.

Today, let's talk about Dice. Of course, everyone knows that the main function of dice is to be random number generators. They come in all different shapes and sizes. The likelihood of generating certain number and number combinations can change the probability of success. We all know this. The question becomes, how do you use these tools to enhance gameplay.

As always, share any innovative uses of Dice you have encountered. What is your preferred dice? D6, d10, d12, d20; something else? How do you use the probabilities in your games? How do you choose your dice type?

I look forward to the discussion in our new home!

As a mainly X-wing player, I use the custom d8's for the game. So I think I'll talk about those a bit.

Now, for those of you who don't know, X-wing uses two sets of dice- Red Attack dice, and Green defense dice. Attacker rolls a number of red dice equal to his ships attack stat, may modify them using any tokens assigned to his ship, and then the defender rolls a number of green defense dice equal to their ships evasion, and tries to cancel the attackers attacks. These Hits/Evades are represented by custom symbols.

Red Attack Dice: 1 Critical hit, 3 Hits, 2 "Focus", 2 Blanks
Green Defence Dice: 3 Evades, 2 "Focus", 3 Blanks

Each evade result will cancel one hit or Crit. Focus results can be turned into Hits or Evades by spending a focus token after rolling. Now, it would be easy to say "Hits are caused on a roll of 5-7, Crits are caused on a roll of 8. To cancel a hit, the defending player must roll 6+ on a d8. After rolling, you may spend a focus token to get a +2 on your roll". However, it is hard to tell what is a hit/miss/focus at a glance under that system, although the odds haven't changed.

Pros:
1) Custom dice make the results of your roll a lot easier to tell at a glance, and remove the necessity of a ton of math in order to tell what results are successful. It's easier to learn that blanks are bad, eyeballs require a focus token to be useful, and other symbols are good when I roll them, than it is to remember a bunch of numbers.
2) I also find that the instant Fail/Success/Dilemma results generated by easy-to-read symbols are more exciting than slowing down to sort numbers into what they mean, even for someone who is good with tons of number and modifiers.
3) Using symbols makes it easier to get your phrasing right- its a lot easier to say "re-roll a [blank]" than it is to say it's equivalent on a numeric d8.

Cons:

1)The dice are proprietary, meaning that if you lose any, or find that niche situation where you are rolling more than the expected amount of dice you have a problem, an you can't just grab replacements anywhere.
2) You can't simply add a +1 bonus to stuff- the only increment available is the 25% of focus results. Therefore, any modifiers you want to give have to work with the dice. Calculating the odds of "Convert 1 focus per attack" or "Re-roll one blank" is a lot more difficult for the designer than simply giving a flat bonus to attacks.
3) A lot of modifiers involve adding or subtracting dice, such as in Star Wars Armada where different dice may only be used at certain ranges. However, this is a fairly coarse way to alter the odds. A firepower 3 X-wing has a lot more punch than a Firepower 2 TIE Fighter- it's more than a flat 50%, and this is something you'll need to account for. One of the problems with this is that you need there to be fewer variables that can modify a roll. A numeric dice I can simply say that each condition will add or subtract one from my hit or evade rolls, while with these dice I need to be creative and cannot just say that each condition will add one attack or defense die, due to how they will spiral out of control.

I like dice that feel good in the hand and have a degree of heft (sorry teeny tiny dice that let you roll 50 at once, too small)

I generally don't like custom dice (especially where all the numbers are replaced) as it just tends to tie you in to a companies products

War Gaming,
It's really useful to be able to roll lots of actions at once, so each action should be 1 dice (so no 2d6 rolls please)

I prefer to have the added variability of a d10, (or d12) over d6s if there are meant to be different races, or wide ranges of technology
(if you're playing napoleonics d6s would be fine)

(I find d8s just don't roll well enough, but then I've never invested in nice d8s so maybe that's just me)

Roleplaying
For roleplaying I like percentile dice for most stuff, but by all means throw in almost all dice for occasional use (eg damage)

(but not d4's they're just silly)

Bordgames
Feel free to invent whatever crazy custom dice you like, or just use standard ones (but not d4s), they'll all come in the box anyway so as long as your mechanics do what you want it's cool

I think that more sides are better within reason, so if the game was designed so you don't need to roll many dice, might as well go for some bigger ones.

I like having more sides as it allows more depth, though i think I'll probably use d10s for the games i want to make, d6's are fine but they don't really do it for me. will need to make it so people wouldn't need to roll to many dice though.

Just a few thoughts:
- Games that use fewer dice tend to run faster - counting out multiple dice is more time consuming than picking up one
- Games with fewer dice types tend to run quicker - players aren't searching through their collection for the dice they need
- Games with fewer dice types tend to be more accommodating to new players - "Now which one was the 8-sided die? Was it the pyramid one or the diamond one?"
- Games with odd dice symbols are less accommodating - I've already got bags of them, and you want me to buy more* **
- Games with a unified dice mechanic run faster - everything rolls high or everything rolls low; no high for X action but low for Y action

*Exception for when the dice ARE the game. Things like Steve Jackson's Cthulhu Dice or Zombie Dice.
**Okay, so I'm a dice geek - I'll always buy more dice. I once destroyed a Magic 8 Ball so I'd have the icosahedron for in game divinations.

 Carlson793 wrote:
Just a few thoughts:
- Games that use fewer dice tend to run faster - counting out multiple dice is more time consuming than picking up one
- Games with fewer dice types tend to run quicker - players aren't searching through their collection for the dice they need
- Games with fewer dice types tend to be more accommodating to new players - "Now which one was the 8-sided die? Was it the pyramid one or the diamond one?"
- Games with odd dice symbols are less accommodating - I've already got bags of them, and you want me to buy more* **
- Games with a unified dice mechanic run faster - everything rolls high or everything rolls low; no high for X action but low for Y action

*Exception for when the dice ARE the game. Things like Steve Jackson's Cthulhu Dice or Zombie Dice.
**Okay, so I'm a dice geek - I'll always buy more dice. I once destroyed a Magic 8 Ball so I'd have the icosahedron for in game divinations.

Agree with most of these points, except for the one on custom dice. In games like X-wing or Armada, you get the dice in the starter set (Meaning the "I have to buy more?" is less of an issue), and the simple Good/Bad/Maybe result is a lot easier for new players to learn.

I prefer D6. When rolling hits and wounds in 40k.

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

 Carlson793 wrote:
Just a few thoughts:
- Games that use fewer dice tend to run faster - counting out multiple dice is more time consuming than picking up one
- Games with fewer dice types tend to run quicker - players aren't searching through their collection for the dice they need
- Games with fewer dice types tend to be more accommodating to new players - "Now which one was the 8-sided die? Was it the pyramid one or the diamond one?"
- Games with odd dice symbols are less accommodating - I've already got bags of them, and you want me to buy more* **
- Games with a unified dice mechanic run faster - everything rolls high or everything rolls low; no high for X action but low for Y action

*Exception for when the dice ARE the game. Things like Steve Jackson's Cthulhu Dice or Zombie Dice.
**Okay, so I'm a dice geek - I'll always buy more dice. I once destroyed a Magic 8 Ball so I'd have the icosahedron for in game divinations.

Agree with most of these points, except for the one on custom dice. In games like X-wing or Armada, you get the dice in the starter set (Meaning the "I have to buy more?" is less of an issue), and the simple Good/Bad/Maybe result is a lot easier for new players to learn.

There are also just some things you can't really do without custom dice, or that are at least very hard. I like centralization but dislike having to add together multiple die rolls to get a result. For one of my current projects the solution has been to use a custom d20 numbered 1-8 with following # of faces:

1x1
2x2
3x3
4x4
5x4
6x3
7x2
8x1

This gets you a reasonable range 1-8, that produces more results in the middle than on the fringes and only needs you to roll a single die per resolution. I just couldn't get all these things if I was sticking to standard dice. I'd need 2d4 added together to get a vaguely similar range.

I often think of the "To Hit" system in Stars 'N' Bars ACW rules, which uses D100.

There is a table showing the percentage chance to hit for each troop type, each weapon and each range: For example, veterans with breech-loading rifles might be 16% at short range, 8% at long range (I made these up BTW.)

There is another table giving tactical modifiers: Flank fire = x1.5, Rear fire = x2, Target in cover = 0.5, and so on.

You multiply the To Hit chance by the tactical modifers, then you multiply it by the number of figures firing. This gives you a single die roll to resolve the whole shooting.

For example, let's say 15 veterans with breech-loaders attack an enemy at short range from the flank. The basic 16% is multiplied by 1.5 to 24%, then by 15 to 360%. This gives you three hits and a 60% chance of a fourth.

The point about this is not that I prefer D100 other dice combinations. It is that the dice have to suit the mechanism designed for the game. In this game, it's basically assumed that players will be pretty good at mental arithmetic. That would not be a good assumption if you were designing a game for younger players, who haven't got the experience with making calculations in their heads.

 Easy E wrote:
D6, d10, d12, d20; something else? How do you use the probabilities in your games? How do you choose your dice type?

For wargames, where strategy is in part based around figuring the statistical outcome of different options, I like there to be no "artificial obscurity". For this purpose I tend to prefer d10 or d20s. That way, I know from that start that everything works in nice 10% or 5% increments, and I can put my mind into looking for all the possible options rather than figuring out how many failed saves from how many wounds from how many hits, taking in accounts all the rerolls, over increments of 16.666667...

God, just writing it down makes my brain want to throw up.

Conceptually, dice are just a way to add a measure of uncertainty to the game. The more reliant the game is on dice rolls, the more arbitrary it becomes. At one extreme is chess, at the other is a dice off.

Psychologically, dice are a powerful physical component that, ironically, gives the player a sense of input or control.

The type of dice should reflect some meaningful aspect of the game. D6s are easy to understand (as they are very commonly used) and, with limited rolls and a unified, simple mechanic, would be well suited to faster, more approachable play but lack the ability to modify odds in smaller increments.
D100s, 1000s, etc. give a high degree of granularity, but often result in charts, tables, and other slower methods of interpretation that often appeals to those desiring a higher degree of detail at the expense of approachability.

One of my biggest gripes about many games is that they seem to lack a fundamental understanding of the probabilities involved with the dice choices. This most commonly occurs when designers seem to no understand probability curves and modifiers. For example, a d100 is extremely unpredictable compared to 3d6, which has a very regular distribution. Trying to show an elite shooter with a +5 modifier on a d100, reflects a poor understanding of the probabilities involved. OTOH, having such modifiers that rolls become guaranteed or unwinnable then brings in the question of why the roll is even made.

I like common d6 dice for simplicity and familiarity. One can do enough manipulations with them, if so inclined, but I'm increasingly a fan of mathless 1d6 over 2d6 or 3d6, and non-exploding for sure.

Otoh, if the budget allows, then I like custom dice with up to 4 pips and blank or special 1 and 6 faces. One can do more here, making the faces distinctive, and tweaking the odds.

As my main focus is boardgames design at the moment I gravitate towards custom dice, there is an elegant simplicity in showing a symbol over a set of numbers.

D6 despite all its faults is the cornerstone of dice, its familiar in shape and provides comfort to the average player it feels it rolls and from a practical standpoint its cheap especially if you want custom dice.

From a designers perspective either 2D6 with their bell curve or D10 and D20 that have a set % modifier are better and I would rather see them used in wargames more than the "bucket of dice" solution that usually involves D6.

If you're looking to throw X+ on multiple dice, the mathematical formula you want is called the Binomial Distribution. which does just that.

It looks a bit hairy scary, but fortunately most spreadsheets have a function for Binomials built in. That allows you to build a table, plotting the number of successes against the number of trials (=dice thrown) and allowing you to calculate the probability of each combination. The Excel function is called BINOM.DIST - I have a spreadsheet laid out if anyone ever wants a copy.

There is also an online dice probability calculator called Anydice that's very useful.

I don't think that the critique is that it is overly difficult to figure out the odds of certain results on multiple D6s, rather that just adding more dice becomes an increasingly cumbersome solution. For example, if each actor rolls 1 dice to act and 1 dice rolled to react, resolution requires two rolls to be made and read. Not bad. What if a unit has ten actors? Now it is 20 rolls. Add in a 3rd component roll and it is 30. Let's say instead that a single model rolls a dice with more results and multiple actors modify that roll based on the number involved instead. Assuming a good execution, this may be preferable as it scales better than just adding more and more dice.

Depends on the game you want to build. Multiple dice work just fine: - a squad attacking requires 1 attack dice in Stargrunt II, perhaps 4-5 in Tomorrow's War and 10+ in 40k, possibly requiring you to also keep track of special weapons separately. Modifiers work as long as they stay low compared to the random-number range - you don't want the D&D 3e problem where you wind up with characters rolling 1D20+35. Again, other systems vary the dice type. One thing about gamers - they sure love rolling the dice.

If you really need a huge pile of random numbers, a spreadsheet can roll as many as you like, and calculate all sorts of stats in the blink of an eye. And yes, I'm well aware of the shortfalls of sequential algorithmic "random" number generation.

I merely offered a way to assess probabilities, for a couple of reasons:

1) Reducing multiple dice to a single percentile roll on a pre-determined table may be a real time-saver;

2) Multiple-dice resolution may have the second axis of a variable target number and the designer, if not the players, needs to assess the relative merits of adding dice vs making it easier to hit.

One element that’s often missed is the act of dice rolling itself. Besides probability and all the rest, it’s an experience, part of the fun of the game. The act of rolling the dice is a major part of the feel of a game.

As an example, there’s a fun feeling of power in rolling bigger dice or more dice. Bloodbowl has, I think, the best version of this, where higher strength and assists gives you two dice, or even three dice. Two dice isn’t just more effective and safer, it feels more powerful. People often chase three dice when they shouldn’t, because it just feels more potent.

40K has plenty of problems, but I bet most people here remember the first time they landed a hit with a template that covered every model in a massive unit, or got their best assault unit in to combat, and then picked up a huge bucket of dice. For the last 20 years the game has been a tactical mess more often than not, but as beer and pretzels fun it’s almost always worked because of simple stuff like feeling powerful because you’re rolling a load of dice.

Now, I’m not saying that more dice always gives that feeling. Rolling 20 lasgun shots, only to pick up half and roll them again, then pick up a third and roll them again, and then tell your opponent to remove one model… well that doesn’t feel very powerful for long.

And nor is a feeling of power what a mechanic needs to evoke. That was just an example. Settlers of Catan has a simple two dice mechanic, but seeing the roll and then scanning the board to see what resources you’ve scored ends up feeling a lot like a craps game. It’s just inherently fun in itself. It was quite a revelation to me to play Settlers on computer and realise how much of the fun went away when the roll was just a flicker on the screen.

In another game you might want a feeling of detail or accuracy. In those games a D100 supplemented with modifiers and tables to look up likely give a feeling of authenticity to the roll.

Speed of resolution and the right kind of probability spread matter, they matter a lot. But if they were all that mattered then we’d just do all this on computer and lose nothing. There is a lot to be said for the feel that different mechanics give a game, especially dice rolling mechanics.

Depends on whether you get bonuses. And rolling three times means that there's lots of room for adding diversity to those bonuses.

I am a fan of d10s - they give a bit more range and are almost as accessible as d6s given the amount of RPGs out there that use percentile.

A thing I have been wracking my brain around is more the amount of dice used at once.

"Buckets of Dice" vs. Some sort of Combat rating.
Say for like a 40k size game (no super heavy craziness, just squad based)

On the one hand you have ease with the buckets. More models in a unit = more dice rolled (depending on attacks). Sometimes this can be cumbersome when you have to roll around 100 or so dice (we have used a laundry hamper to roll dice in before)

Then, theres a combat rating where the model count and weapon strength adds dice to a pool. Modifiers would be more or less dice. but never to the vast numbers of bucket of dice.

This causes more math on the player though, and seems much slower than just saying "I got 10 guys with one attack, I need 10 dice"

Larger die types though fill up a hand much quicker than d6s so the "bucket of dice" method could be more cumbersome

Momotaro wrote:
There is also an online dice probability calculator called Anydice that's very useful.

I've been getting a lot of useful help out of AnyDice, especially given my non-existent statistics or calculus background.

Dice-wise, I've started to get away from looking at single dies of any type just because of the inherent randomness of rolling any number rather than a particular range.
More than three to four dice at one time though is probably unnecessary once you've covered the peak or bell curve possibilities available to a few d10s/d12s or a d20.

Physically, I've never cared for the d4 at all, and I think that most of the time both d8s and d20s don't roll (or stop for the 20) as well as the d6s, d10s, or d12s tend to do; I will admit to owning a d30 though.


One idea I've been looking at (which I'm sure is already inherent to some game) is having the type of dice used be distinctive to signify what they are being rolled for; I.E. d6s are for cover and point defense, d10s are model skill, d12s for missiles/rockets, etc etc.
With the right (small) set of modifiers (+ or -, but not both) and/or number of dice rolled using that distinction seems a workable idea, and is probably a lot simpler than systems where you either use different types together or else go up and down types for whatever game mechanism occurs.

_
_

Graxous wrote:
I am a fan of d10s - they give a bit more range and are almost as accessible as d6s given the amount of RPGs out there that use percentile.

A thing I have been wracking my brain around is more the amount of dice used at once.

"Buckets of Dice" vs. Some sort of Combat rating.

Say for like a 40k size game (no super heavy craziness, just squad based)

"I got 10 guys with one attack, I need 10 dice"

I find d10s to be essentially similar to d6s, merely doubling the potential non-CF / non-CH results from 4 to 8. A d10 is functionally identical to a d6, except it Crits less often. One nice thing about d6s is that it allows (forces) very clear distinctions between things, due to the larger step size, versus agonizing between a 6+ and a 7+. Beware of forcing d10 over d6, simply to not use d6s.

Buckets of dice are actually a bad thing, as they become less-random, but rather approach statistical certainty. This makes almost no sense for armies like Orks, which are supposed to vary wildly.

40k-sized games are problematic due to the game scale itself, 50-ish models per side in a typical game.
____

 Smilodon_UP wrote:
Dice-wise, I've started to get away from looking at single dies of any type just because of the inherent randomness of rolling any number rather than a particular range.
More than three to four dice at one time though is probably unnecessary once you've covered the peak or bell curve possibilities available to a few d10s/d12s or a d20.

Physically, I've never cared for the d4 at all, and I think that most of the time both d8s and d20s don't roll (or stop for the 20) as well as the d6s, d10s, or d12s tend to do; I will admit to owning a d30 though.

One idea I've been looking at (which I'm sure is already inherent to some game) is having the type of dice used be distinctive to signify what they are being rolled for; I.E. d6s are for cover and point defense, d10s are model skill, d12s for missiles/rockets, etc etc.
With the right (small) set of modifiers (+ or -, but not both) and/or number of dice rolled using that distinction seems a workable idea, and is probably a lot simpler than systems where you either use different types together or else go up and down types for whatever game mechanism occurs.

Mechanically, I think you want a 2dX game, that modifies up/down to a 3dX game, discarding the highest or lowest die. I believe HGB is like that.

Physically, consider a dice tower, or else dice cups with a dice tray. I personally have a felted dice cup, and I think it adds to the experience.

I'm not huge on mixed die sizes, especially mixed die sizes for the sake of mixing die sizes. And then specifically omitting d4s and d8s because of personal preference. For the scale of d6-d12, I think you are basically describing a chromed-up d6 system. Unless you have a very clear reason for polyhedrals, and why one mechanic is d10 and the other is d12, and why neither can use the other's die.

Many old board wargames are played using a single D6 and a combat results table (CRT) which gives you a matrix of the ratio of attack versus defence and the effect for each die result. You can also have modifiers to the die or to the column.

The great advantage of this is that it is very quick to use if you can get your head around working out the odds.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Many old board wargames are played using a single D6 and a combat results table (CRT) which gives you a matrix of the ratio of attack versus defence and the effect for each die result. You can also have modifiers to the die or to the column.

Classic example: Ogre. which requires summation of attack power divided by defense, to find the column.

Numerically, I think this could just as well have been handled by individual A rolls, removing the summing and division mini-game, at the expense of more dice being rolled.

IMO, the best system I've seen is how Super Dungeon Explore / Conan handle it, with a variable number of custom dice giving up to 4 pips that the player simply counts. Very fast, very smooth, and very granular from a design perspective.

I will agree, this is one of the things I test atm and it work quite well.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember if the OGRE/GEV CRT chart also allowed for DRMs (e.g. minus 1 if the target is in cover.) No doubt there are wargames where you do have DRMs as well as the odds based CRT.

It could be replicated by multiple die rolling. I don't know if such would be any quicker. Multiple die rolling certainly would become slower when DRMs need to be taken into account, as in AoS.

One of the things about odds calculations charts is that once the players have got used to them, they become easier to use, while you will never reduce the time it takes to roll and count 50 dice. Perhaps a dice rolling app could be used, though from what I gather, a lot of people like rolling lots of dice.

It partly depends if you see the important bit as working out the result, or getting the result.

The Ogre CRT increased defense 2x or 3x depending on terrain ("cover"). It's actually rather excessively involved.

I submit that it is a fundamental design flaw if any individual resolution step requires a dozen dice. Or more.

Could you clarify the SDE/Conan system?

Having a d6 as a randomizer only to largely offset it by large dice volume is counterproductive. 10 models each testing with a d6 is a very different effect than a group of 40 models each rolling d6. 40k hits this because it can't decide if it wants to be skirmish or squad scale so does both pretty poorly. For units, each should only use the randomizer on a per unit basis with modifiers based on it's relative strength, morale, etc. Rolling for each model when everything is in squads is poor design, especially with multiple rolls required per model. Likewise, casualty tracking on a per model basis in unnecessary- the unit is either functioning normally, reduced effectiveness or functionally destroyed.

SDE / Conan have 3 "levels" of dice:
a) X 0 0 1 1 2
b) Y 0 1 1 2 3
c) Z 0 1 2 3 4

Characters and monsters are rated with Attack / Defense dice, for opposed die tests. A typical SDE Hero might have an aaa or bb rating in their primary stats, and aa in their secondary stats. This gives the designer quite a bit of granularity in assigning power levels. Players roll the dice and it's easy to count pips, because it's usually a small number.


The rules for SDE are available for download:
http://sodapopminiatures.com/media/downloads/super-dungeon-explore-rulebook-1_5-web.pdf

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Smilodon_UP wrote:
Dice-wise, I've started to get away from looking at single dies of any type just because of the inherent randomness of rolling any number rather than a particular range.
One idea I've been looking at (which I'm sure is already inherent to some game) is having the type of dice used be distinctive to signify what they are being rolled for; I.E. d6s are for cover and point defense, d10s are model skill, d12s for missiles/rockets, etc etc.
With the right (small) set of modifiers (+ or -, but not both) and/or number of dice rolled using that distinction seems a workable idea, and is probably a lot simpler than systems where you either use different types together or else go up and down types for whatever game mechanism occurs.

Mechanically, I think you want a 2dX game, that modifies up/down to a 3dX game, discarding the highest or lowest die. I believe HGB is like that.

I'm not huge on mixed die sizes, especially mixed die sizes for the sake of mixing die sizes. And then specifically omitting d4s and d8s because of personal preference. For the scale of d6-d12, I think you are basically describing a chromed-up d6 system. Unless you have a very clear reason for polyhedrals, and why one mechanic is d10 and the other is d12, and why neither can use the other's die.

For the type of game I'm futzing about with not using d4 or d8 also gave a better average range for how I wanted to use the d6s, alongside not having to get into how to separate the same die type within the same roll result.

Namely because the activating player rolls unopposed [xd10+x] - [xd6+x] looking for a 0 or better; 2d6, 3d6, or 4d6 represents how much protection from using terrain the target has at that particular moment, with very few potential modifiers to either die type.
Everything is so accurate in the technological assumptions for the setting that within the time and distance of a turn accounting for any target movement or range within the visual horizon would be too inconsequential.

Out of the working concepts I already dropped 5d6 as being too flat a curve, and 3d10 as being too great an advantage over basic [lowest 2 of 3d10] skill.
Moderate skill will use 2d10, and advanced skill [highest 2 of 3d10].

Missiles, some rockets, gun launched guided projectiles will use the d12s in an opposed roll vs the target countermeasures and point defense systems.

_
_

 Smilodon_UP wrote:
For the type of game I'm futzing about with not using d4 or d8 also gave a better average range for how I wanted to use the d6s, alongside not having to get into how to separate the same die type within the same roll result.

Namely because the activating player rolls unopposed [xd10+x] - [xd6+x] looking for a 0 or better; 2d6, 3d6, or 4d6 represents how much protection from using terrain the target has at that particular moment, with very few potential modifiers to either die type.
Everything is so accurate in the technological assumptions for the setting that within the time and distance of a turn accounting for any target movement or range within the visual horizon would be too inconsequential.

Out of the working concepts I already dropped 5d6 as being too flat a curve, and 3d10 as being too great an advantage over basic [lowest 2 of 3d10] skill.
Moderate skill will use 2d10, and advanced skill [highest 2 of 3d10].

Missiles, some rockets, gun launched guided projectiles will use the d12s in an opposed roll vs the target countermeasures and point defense systems.

It seems to me that you should simply assume that all weapons automatically hit. Defender attempts to save via cover / armor. Then assess damage based on weapon characteristsics. That could be a cleaner mechanic.