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.

Was thinking about a interesting narrative way to play 40k and add a little more luck to the game. What if everything on a 6 (like a natural 20 in D&D) was a success. Like always hitting, Wounding, passing moral and armour save if you don't have an invuln. What do you guys think?

I think always hitting almost definitely; this would help to not make the -1 to hit traits so OP compared to any others.

yep a natural 6 should always hit

I don't think a natural 6 should always be a success for everything, because then everyone has a 6 invulnerable save if you think about it.
However I do agree that a natural 6 "To Hit" is a good idea to mitigate all the -1 to hit penalties that prevent Orks from even having a shooting phase.

I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Who it benefits more is totally irrelevant. It's a fundamental issue with how the game is designed right now. Some armies are completely neutralised by the stacking nature of modifiers. It must change.

As for the general idea of the OP, critical success on a D20 is 5%, on a D6 it's 16.667%. That makes a huge difference, and as Galef pointed out, it cannot work for saving throws.

Sure, the game design has issues...but always hitting on 6's doesn't fix that. It's equally as bad.

I think always hitting on natural 6's should have been part of the core rules.

 Nym wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Who it benefits more is totally irrelevant. It's a fundamental issue with how the game is designed right now. Some armies are completely neutralised by the stacking nature of modifiers. It must change.

It is actually relevant to who this change benefits. But considering it would benefit Orks the most, who currently do not have a shooting phase against -1 penalty stacking armies, it is still a change that should happen.

It would only be irrelevant if the change benefitted already top tier armies and did nothing to help the lower tier ones. That's the point of balance

-

For hitting and wounding, sure. That's already the case until you get a modifier, and those are too punitive for low BS armies right now.

For saves? No. I can't see why anyone would want that.

For leadership? Haha, that's a funny one! If you mean natural 1s, I still disagree. Failed morale is the most punishing for hordes, and they don't need extra help.

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Unless those armies suddenly have costs adjusted to reflect their low bs/ws then this is exactly the point. There are armies currently in the game that pay the same price as a space marine does to carry the same weapon, with sometimes 1/3rd the chance of it actually doing anything (other times 0 chance).

As I see it, if a 1 always fails, then a 6 should always pass.

I wouldn't actually mind some units getting 1+ armour saves, for example - units that NEED weapons stronger than a normal rifle to penetrate (Terminator Armour). Some units being so good at shooting that they ALWAYS hit, unless negatively affected (Vindicare Assassins), some that can ALWAYS make a hit in close combat via some supernatural methods, unless they've been duped via some arcane means (Lelith Hesperax).

If 6s shouldn't be allowed to always pass, 1s shouldn't always fail.

Unpopular oppinion, go back to the old BS and WS system

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As I see it, if a 1 always fails, then a 6 should always pass.

I wouldn't actually mind some units getting 1+ armour saves, for example - units that NEED weapons stronger than a normal rifle to penetrate (Terminator Armour). Some units being so good at shooting that they ALWAYS hit, unless negatively affected (Vindicare Assassins), some that can ALWAYS make a hit in close combat via some supernatural methods, unless they've been duped via some arcane means (Lelith Hesperax).

If 6s shouldn't be allowed to always pass, 1s shouldn't always fail.

I was surprised when they didn't include 1+ saves with a 1's always fail caveat. Would have been a great way to distinguish things like Terminator armor from Artificer Armor.

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As I see it, if a 1 always fails, then a 6 should always pass.

I wouldn't actually mind some units getting 1+ armour saves, for example - units that NEED weapons stronger than a normal rifle to penetrate (Terminator Armour). Some units being so good at shooting that they ALWAYS hit, unless negatively affected (Vindicare Assassins), some that can ALWAYS make a hit in close combat via some supernatural methods, unless they've been duped via some arcane means (Lelith Hesperax).

If 6s shouldn't be allowed to always pass, 1s shouldn't always fail.

I was surprised when they didn't include 1+ saves with a 1's always fail caveat. Would have been a great way to distinguish things like Terminator armor from Artificer Armor.

And Terminators from things like Centurions (do they still have 2+ saves?)

Those units which have armour SO thick that a basic weapon has no hope of even breaking it once would be great with 1+ armour - things like Terminators, Custodes Allarus Terminators, anything larger than a Knight Titan, Monoliths, etc etc.

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Exactly it. It isn't even entirely prevalent. Maybe don't shoot that single unit with a -3 to hit or god forbid have melee if you're that concerned. Sorry your guard army can't hit one or two units?

The only army that SHOULD always hit on a 6 is Orks, and that's for fluff as well.

The main effect of "6s always hit" on real games is going to be that, when you would otherwise already need a 6 to hit, you can go ahead and move with a heavy weapon or advance with an assault weapon before firing.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Exactly it. It isn't even entirely prevalent. Maybe don't shoot that single unit with a -3 to hit or god forbid have melee if you're that concerned. Sorry your guard army can't hit one or two units?

The only army that SHOULD always hit on a 6 is Orks, and that's for fluff as well.

Except that usually that one unit you can't possibly hit is on an objective, in a critical spot where it must die, or just the only viable target for a major portion of your army. It's a type of play that can't really be countered by certain armies. Like IG for example, unless I play very specific regiments, I can't raise my BS. So when a player just pops -3 BS, that unit is invulnerable to 99% of my army. This means I have to resort to soup or spam weird units like tank commanders just to have a chance to hit.

GW wanted this to be an edition where you can theoretically play with any unit and least have a chance of putting up a fight. If that's the case (6's always wound for example) why are some armies allowed unit abilities where they literally cannot be targeted by other armies for entire phases? That is flat out bad game design.

Not to mention most games with stacking modifiers at least give some sort of hail Mary shot so you at least have something. Bolt Action for example let's you roll a 6 on top of a 6 as an "impossible shot". Yeah the odds are low you'll actually hit, but at least it's something.


We're also forgetting to mention here that -BS mods are arguably one of the strongest abilities in the game and most armies with access to it are probably not appropriately costed with it in mind, especially when it stacks. I can live with a -1, it sucks but you can weight of fire it to bring it down, you can beat it as a shooting player if you're smart without relying on soup. But when it stacks, you knock entire classes of weapons and units out of the game. Does this sound familiar? Because that was what invisibility did last edition with those fething super friend rerolling invuln bubbles that helped almost kill 40k in 7th edition. This is doing the same thing. Its an almost untouchable unit at range that some armies just can't do anything about. And before you say "just bring melee" I'd love you to show me a viable melee unit in my IG codex that has more than a 6" move. Yeah I can totally counter units across the table with a faster move with some bullgryn. My only other option is stormtrooper drops and depending on the turn the target is either screened or it's past turn 3 and I've already committed them.

so yeah there's my rant

TL;DR any mechanic that flat out shuts down certain armies is a bad mechanic. Saying something like -3 BS is totally fine and not a big deal is like me coming in and saying "hey 30pt commissars that never let me lose more than one model every morale phase for my whole army is totally fine, just get good. Heaven forbid you have to bring some 200pt snipers."

I think an “exploding result” would be better for the game - if you roll a 6, roll an addional die and add to the result for those cases where you need a 7+ (To Hit’s rolls, and Armor Rolls affected by AP). I’d prefer if the addional die was a D6-3, so if you needed a 7, you’d need to roll 6 on the first die, then a 4+ on the second roll (about a 8% chance); for an 8, a 6 followed by 5+ (About 5% chance), and for a 9 a 6 followed by a 6 (about a 2.7% chance).

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Exactly it. It isn't even entirely prevalent. Maybe don't shoot that single unit with a -3 to hit or god forbid have melee if you're that concerned. Sorry your guard army can't hit one or two units?

The only army that SHOULD always hit on a 6 is Orks, and that's for fluff as well.

Except that usually that one unit you can't possibly hit is on an objective, in a critical spot where it must die, or just the only viable target for a major portion of your army. It's a type of play that can't really be countered by certain armies. Like IG for example, unless I play very specific regiments, I can't raise my BS. So when a player just pops -3 BS, that unit is invulnerable to 99% of my army. This means I have to resort to soup or spam weird units like tank commanders just to have a chance to hit.

GW wanted this to be an edition where you can theoretically play with any unit and least have a chance of putting up a fight. If that's the case (6's always wound for example) why are some armies allowed unit abilities where they literally cannot be targeted by other armies for entire phases? That is flat out bad game design.

Not to mention most games with stacking modifiers at least give some sort of hail Mary shot so you at least have something. Bolt Action for example let's you roll a 6 on top of a 6 as an "impossible shot". Yeah the odds are low you'll actually hit, but at least it's something.


We're also forgetting to mention here that -BS mods are arguably one of the strongest abilities in the game and most armies with access to it are probably not appropriately costed with it in mind, especially when it stacks. I can live with a -1, it sucks but you can weight of fire it to bring it down, you can beat it as a shooting player if you're smart without relying on soup. But when it stacks, you knock entire classes of weapons and units out of the game. Does this sound familiar? Because that was what invisibility did last edition with those fething super friend rerolling invuln bubbles that helped almost kill 40k in 7th edition. This is doing the same thing. Its an almost untouchable unit at range that some armies just can't do anything about. And before you say "just bring melee" I'd love you to show me a viable melee unit in my IG codex that has more than a 6" move. Yeah I can totally counter units across the table with a faster move with some bullgryn. My only other option is stormtrooper drops and depending on the turn the target is either screened or it's past turn 3 and I've already committed them.

so yeah there's my rant

TL;DR any mechanic that flat out shuts down certain armies is a bad mechanic. Saying something like -3 BS is totally fine and not a big deal is like me coming in and saying "hey 30pt commissars that never let me lose more than one model every morale phase for my whole army is totally fine, just get good. Heaven forbid you have to bring some 200pt snipers."

1. Which means the opponent planned on making sure they could keep that objective. If you don't like it, charge the unit.
2. B.S. modifiers are the strongest because a bunch of people want to play gunline (Tau and Guard) or are forced to because of crap internal balance (Loyalist Scum and AdMech). Tau and Guard have at least auxiliary units that SHOULD take care of that but don't because internal balance again. Stacked modifiers not happening anymore wouldn't make those units better, right? You weren't using them in the first place.
3. There's already a few armies that don't do ANYTHING in certain phases. Necrons and Dark Eldar with no psychic phase is the easiest example of that. That's not bad design is it?

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
I know where this is coming from, but it benefits lower BS/WS armies exponentially more.

Exactly it. It isn't even entirely prevalent. Maybe don't shoot that single unit with a -3 to hit or god forbid have melee if you're that concerned. Sorry your guard army can't hit one or two units?

The only army that SHOULD always hit on a 6 is Orks, and that's for fluff as well.

Except that usually that one unit you can't possibly hit is on an objective, in a critical spot where it must die, or just the only viable target for a major portion of your army. It's a type of play that can't really be countered by certain armies. Like IG for example, unless I play very specific regiments, I can't raise my BS. So when a player just pops -3 BS, that unit is invulnerable to 99% of my army. This means I have to resort to soup or spam weird units like tank commanders just to have a chance to hit.

GW wanted this to be an edition where you can theoretically play with any unit and least have a chance of putting up a fight. If that's the case (6's always wound for example) why are some armies allowed unit abilities where they literally cannot be targeted by other armies for entire phases? That is flat out bad game design.

Not to mention most games with stacking modifiers at least give some sort of hail Mary shot so you at least have something. Bolt Action for example let's you roll a 6 on top of a 6 as an "impossible shot". Yeah the odds are low you'll actually hit, but at least it's something.


We're also forgetting to mention here that -BS mods are arguably one of the strongest abilities in the game and most armies with access to it are probably not appropriately costed with it in mind, especially when it stacks. I can live with a -1, it sucks but you can weight of fire it to bring it down, you can beat it as a shooting player if you're smart without relying on soup. But when it stacks, you knock entire classes of weapons and units out of the game. Does this sound familiar? Because that was what invisibility did last edition with those fething super friend rerolling invuln bubbles that helped almost kill 40k in 7th edition. This is doing the same thing. Its an almost untouchable unit at range that some armies just can't do anything about. And before you say "just bring melee" I'd love you to show me a viable melee unit in my IG codex that has more than a 6" move. Yeah I can totally counter units across the table with a faster move with some bullgryn. My only other option is stormtrooper drops and depending on the turn the target is either screened or it's past turn 3 and I've already committed them.

so yeah there's my rant

TL;DR any mechanic that flat out shuts down certain armies is a bad mechanic. Saying something like -3 BS is totally fine and not a big deal is like me coming in and saying "hey 30pt commissars that never let me lose more than one model every morale phase for my whole army is totally fine, just get good. Heaven forbid you have to bring some 200pt snipers."

I always laughed when people told me tro bring snipers and shut up.... When I played Orks! Who have no snipers! But no really... My mate who plays a shooty Loota army almost cried vs a Raven guard game. He couldn't move a single unit or he couldn't shoot... but really... how woukd always 6s be bad? It would only ever effect Ork players unless a person was stacking -3s... at that point you're already hitting 90% of units down to a 6 up anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stormonu wrote:
I think an “exploding result” would be better for the game - if you roll a 6, roll an addional die and add to the result for those cases where you need a 7+ (To Hit’s rolls, and Armor Rolls affected by AP). I’d prefer if the addional die was a D6-3, so if you needed a 7, you’d need to roll 6 on the first die, then a 4+ on the second roll (about a 8% chance); for an 8, a 6 followed by 5+ (About 5% chance), and for a 9 a 6 followed by a 6 (about a 2.7% chance).

Or maybe if you can't hit you hit on 6s then reroll those 6s at normal BS

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Unpopular oppinion, go back to the old BS and WS system

Shouldn't be unpopular, really.

1) Reduce the number of "to hit" penalties generally speaking...not enough time or consideration is put into these. The concept is fine, the execution is not. This is further complicated by soup - something which needs to be considered far more when making codices.
2) Bring back the old BS, but allow it to exceed 10 (if needed). This means that a BS of 5 is still a 2+, whereas a BS of 7 is a 2+ even if it suffers a -2 to hit, meaning that you can more accurately represent hyper-skilled beings.
3) Bring back the old WS number, BUT...simplify it using the current to-wound table, instead of a calculating table.

1. Which means the opponent planned on making sure they could keep that objective. If you don't like it, charge the unit.
2. B.S. modifiers are the strongest because a bunch of people want to play gunline (Tau and Guard) or are forced to because of crap internal balance (Loyalist Scum and AdMech). Tau and Guard have at least auxiliary units that SHOULD take care of that but don't because internal balance again. Stacked modifiers not happening anymore wouldn't make those units better, right? You weren't using them in the first place.
3. There's already a few armies that don't do ANYTHING in certain phases. Necrons and Dark Eldar with no psychic phase is the easiest example of that. That's not bad design is it?

1. That's a dumb argument. It's basically the other guys argument in reverse. He took lots of shooting to keep you off the object. He doesn't like it's all for nothing so change it.
2.there is nothing wrong with playing an army the way you want to play. Especially if it worked fine for several editions. Take Orks and my friends Lootas. He plays shooty Orks and always has. There is nothing wrong with that and it's very fluffy. Suddenly his edition they don't work against certain armies. At all... like he can't even hit them. Why should he have to go out there and buy more troops and change his beloved army? Why should you be invincible? There is no way to say who shoukd be in he right but the best solution would be to make sure you have equal chances of winning then you can both be happy rather than just 1 player. And this is friendly games I'm talking about!
3.Necrons do basically have that phase now so that argument is gone... but really. There is a huge difference between a max of 6 mortal wounds if you are lucky vs an entire 2k points not veing able to shoot. Most IG armies don't have psykers but they do have shooting... and if you're bring mostly physics then you're losing shooting... i'm sure someone can make a better argument than I can with numbers and crap but i'm too tired right now.

 Formosa wrote:
yep a natural 6 should always hit

yup

There was a time when hitting had -1 thru -6 for to hit penalties.

The way the worked with models that needed a 7 or an 8+ was this.

If you rolled a 6 and then a 4+ on a second roll you hit 7+

if you rolled a 6 and then a 6+ on a second roll you hit 8+

So there was always a chance to hit no matter what.

I think they could revisit that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In fact I think some of the lasguns taking down a warlord titan could go this way.

Some mechanic that means even your str 2 or 3 weapon wont auto wound on a 1 in 6 chance. But rather you need to roll another roll for each 6 and on a 4+ or 6+ then it will wound....perhaps its a mortal wound or something....but for those out there that hate auto pistols taking out a Leman Russ...it would go a long way to satisfying their tongue biting.

 admironheart wrote:
There was a time when hitting had -1 thru -6 for to hit penalties.

The way the worked with models that needed a 7 or an 8+ was this.
If you rolled a 6 and then a 4+ on a second roll you hit 7+
if you rolled a 6 and then a 6+ on a second roll you hit 8+
So there was always a chance to hit no matter what.
I think they could revisit that.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
In fact I think some of the lasguns taking down a warlord titan could go this way.

Some mechanic that means even your str 2 or 3 weapon wont auto wound on a 1 in 6 chance. But rather you need to roll another roll for each 6 and on a 4+ or 6+ then it will wound....perhaps its a mortal wound or something....but for those out there that hate auto pistols taking out a Leman Russ...it would go a long way to satisfying their tongue biting.

That was the way I thought they were going to do the "everything can wound everything" by having things need to roll a 6 followed by another number.
Would make infinitely more sense too, and give more meaning to each individual strength value . A Lasgun shooting a Titan should have astronomical odds against doing any damage.

But back in the spirit of the post, if there is a roll where failure always happens, there should be a way of always passing too.

Huh, I like tyat idea and would go a long way in cutting down hordes winning spam.

 Cream Tea wrote:
For hitting and wounding, sure. That's already the case until you get a modifier, and those are too punitive for low BS armies right now.

For saves? No. I can't see why anyone would want that.

For leadership? Haha, that's a funny one! If you mean natural 1s, I still disagree. Failed morale is the most punishing for hordes, and they don't need extra help.

this I'm ok with to hit and wound but not saves or moral as it just makes horde armies harder to kill and it's already hard enough as it is for elite armies. Especially when you are playing an elite army with very little models on the table like a thousand sons army focusing more on marines. our biggest advantage to give us a chance at winning against horde armies like orks is that their troops won't be getting an armour save and it's possible to remove some more during the moral phase.

I would kill for a -1 to hit on Grey Knights, its just the nature of the game that people will take such an ability. It is literally the potential to outright negate (assuming a 3+ BS) 25% of the incoming fire, WITH the bonus that Plasma blows itself up on 1 and 2.

You really should be looking to limit how many factions actually get this ability rather than going the other way to effectively make every horde have a 6+ invul.

I feel like GW has two options to correct some of the issues.

Either remove all -1 modifers to rolls so armies with bad hit rolls can actually function.

Or, they make roll to 6 an automatic hit/wound.

Currently we have 6 as an automatic wound so I see no reason why not apply the same to hit.