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.

Hi there Gamer Guys n Gals,

40k, in it's current state, has many, many issues. as such, I'm developing a new way of playing with our beloved toy soldiers. One that reduces firepower across the board. One that requires less models. One that requires more terrain. One that requires less space, with reduced ranges...


GW got greedy.... bigger battles = bigger armies < more sales.


What I intend to do is incentivise purchases on aesthetic; when I'm done, no model will be invalidated. A return to USR will be evident, but instead of handed out like candy; earned through meeting prerequisites.
I hope that with some backing from Dakka, I can create an evolving landscape. I'mma gonna need feedback, and a lot of it.


Now; there will be painting and modelling; fear not, all boards, terrain types, and miniatures will be shown off in their dreadfully low-quality glory.

Oh and one other thing.... the D6 system has got to go. I'm sorry but a minimum of 16.7% chance of success is b******t when we're talking about grenade throws through buildings, sniper fire from a board away, and guardsmen being stamped on by titans. Initially I planned to jump straight to D20 based-gameplay, but I wonder if a D12 would be an easier building block to work with?


The odds are translatable easiliy enough into D20?
6+ = 16+ (16.667%)
5+= 13+ (33.334%)
4+ = 10+ (50.000%)
3+ = 7+ (66.667%)
2+ = 4+ (82?%ish)

-You get the point. with bigger numbers, comes an inherant leverage.
It always annoyed me that Humans scaled up so poorly compared to the fluff... An Astartes can lose an arm or a heart and keep fighting, punch through walls etc... for *1 Point* of strength and toughness. *Sigh*.

Terrain needs sorting the F out... what were they thinking? It's gonna be interactive too. Barrels that Explore, Supplies that grant bonuses etc.

It's a work in progress, but this game aims to bring some joy back to my toy soldiers, and with any luck, other people's too....

First up, some very basic terrain. I have a more complex set up in progress already, but for beta testing, I'm building a board with 4 of the new Ryza pattern STC Ruins, and some scatter terrain, barrels, ammo crates, comms relays, teleport homers etc. etc.


See you soon,
GamerGuy


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let's talk about Statlines. As previously discussed, 40k does not scale up well. it is my intention, therefore; to scale it down. but past the D6 system:...I aim to bring Precision to Wargaming. all values from here on in, are out of 20. most of the game was based on a S&T 10 cap anyway, so simply doubling the values should give a working figure...


In addition, ALL ranges are being reduced by half. Movement will be 2d4 for Infantry units

A typical Guardsman will be:
M Ws Bs S T W A Ld Sv
2d4 10+ 10+ 6 6 1 1 6 13+

A Tactical Marine will be:
M Ws Bs S T W A Ld Sv
2d4 7+ 7+ 8 8 1 1 9 7+

------------
Just some groundwork, keeping it here for my own records and for progression tracking...

This sounds like a shift to a skirmish sized game, do you plan to draw inspiration from previous skirmish iterations such as Kill Team or Shadow War: Armageddon, or even further afield with the likes of Infinity (for example)? In these smaller scale battles, how do you see current superheavy/titan sized models such as Baneblades or Knights fitting in?

As a hobbyist with limited time I prefer skirmish style battles to larger engagements anyway, since the point of entry for is lower (less models to paint!), so this is interesting to me.

Balancing potentially every unit against every other unit isn't feasible with the current d6 system, but reworking the system from the ground up is a monumental feat, good luck with it and I'm keen to see how your iterations stack up.

Eyyyy there's interest in my endeavour!! or a pity post lmao?

Just glanced your blog over; it seems we're quite likeminded in terms of favouring RPG style rules and skirmishes in the grimdark future.... the paint job on that chaplain is infuriatingly good.... somehow both weathered and crisp.... so very jealous.

I'll admit now that I'm a GW elitist.... never played tabletop games that weren't gw or just board games…

Yes I'll be drawing from kill team, shadow war, necromunda etc. as my focus is on lowering the entry point for 40k. this projects working title was "40k £40".... the concept: that 1/2 boxes of miniatures was the perfect gateway drug.... and cheaper than a videogame!!

Yeah no.... I love titannic units.... but unless written into a scenario (see coming post; Knight Fighting) they'll be reserved for mainstream 40k for now.


Just finished a 13hour shift so I'mma sleep.... more coming!!

GamerGuy

Moved to a more appropriate forum.

You ar enow on the path to damnation! Many wargamer designers started by trying to build a better 40K.

Welcome to the dark side!

Building a better 40k is a great place to start with game design though. Failure is a powerful teacher.

@OP - I wish you the best of luck in trying to "fix" 40k.

You have your work cut out for you. Personally, random movement makes the game a non-starter for me; I'm not going to roll 2d4 for every infantry model that I want to move.

You've got the process completely wrong and are making a typical newbie designer mistake. Stop getting bogged down in the details of exactly how much movement a particular unit will have and start looking at high-level design goals. What are you trying to accomplish with this game, besides making it not suck and be vaguely like 40k? How will the experience of a typical game go? What things about the existing 40k rules are most important? Is anything important enough to keep, or do you just want a new game set in the 40k universe? Until you come up with good answers to questions like this there's no point in worrying about whether movement will be 2d4" or D6+2" or whatever.

Ok; thanks for the feedback lads; this is what I need!!

peregrine, I hope you'll visit this frequently, your harsh but BS-free feedback is encouraging, if a little abrasive

Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough. I'm talking about down-scaling as the core principal. 10-15 models aside on average. a 2x2 realm of battle board, with dense cities of death artwork-style terrain. I'm talking about creating an immersive gaming experience with specific missions that tell the story on their own. "Activate Objective A" "Destroy Unit B" "Defend Building C" "Escort Character D to Evac point" etc. I'm talking about making a game where placement matters a whole lot, and where characters can grow and develop over the course of one evening. I'm talking about creating a map taht's small but fine detailed, so that computers can be accessed, barrels explode, emplaced weapons can be fired ammo collected....

I've recently been introduced to DnD and feel that the Roleplaying aspect of interactions is really underrated. 40k can be too aggressive and confrontational. I want to create a social game, that gets players talking and developing backstory's... My aim is to forge mission templates that can be altered to suit player's needs, and that promotes a story telling as opposed to a You-Win-I-Win atmosphere. I like the old school gang rosters of Necromunda (2nd ed??), that had so much potential.


I know this project is one hell of a reach, but stick with me boys, I refuse to fail.


GamerGuy





Automatically Appended Next Post:
For the next few hours I'll be online tinkering with my game; hmu here or DM's if anyone has any contributions? keep the feedback coming lads, if I'm being unrealistic fair play, shoot me down this is gonna be a steep learning curve.

Does anyone else have old-ass copies of white dwarf at home? remember those tables? 4 trees and a hill for a gaming surface? 30models aside at 1000pts? doesn't anyone else miss that??


tabletop wargaming can't attract new blood because we're shat on by video games, they're instant reward for investment. but video games that go big are ones that have an effective multiplayer. and this is because fundamentally, as much as we're grown men playing with toy-soldiers, we want to play with others. Wargaming is a social experience at it's best, and with the current state of the game, and it's nature of wiping each other in 3 turns flat, doesn't make for an easy-going atmosphere. Imagine rocking up with the intention of telling a story, instead of my army is gonna embarrass yours? Where two or more players agree what races they'd like to see in action and collaborate to unfold the events of the game. a more relaxed setting where people take risks because it's a laugh instead of the more efficient "gunline" tactics...

Imagine 40k for the cost of a video game? talking a friend into a gameway unit; and being able to play for £20-30? having a painting sesh around the dining table over a beer and developing each character as you paint them up... what motivates them, where they come from, what they believe... and after a few games what they've survived or accomplished?? we've all had that mini that survived an orbital strike or threw the grenade that killed your opponents prized model?

I don't know; maybe I'm crazy? but there's gotta be a way of doing this. and if it takes me years I'mma find it.

GamerGuy



Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for earlier feedback, fine, stuff the movement value, make it a flat 4"? I figured randomising movement would add a risk-reward factor "will they make it between the 2 pieces of cover or be gunned down transitioning?" but you're right, it will slow the game down too much. thanks for the input.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
CORE PRINCIPALS:

7th Ed Cover Saves -sorry 8th, your cover rules suck.

New Armour System!! -AP modifiers improved cheap grunts too much over more elite units. not sure quite where I'm headed, but I'm charging head on and will let you know what I run into. Maybe just making modifiers rarer and improving strength.


Wound Table: I like 8th's wound system for the dark imperium box set.... but outside of those units a flat "if its higher, equal or lower" system kinda bugs me. not sure why.


Fully Interactive Terrain -Terrain set ups are often captivating and a source of intrigue for fresh blood. While in 7th no one really used the advanced terrain rules for re-rolls in certain buildings or near supplies; if they acted more like the buff auras of 8th maybe players would be forced to make tactical decisions in regards to placement??

Firepower Reductions... why is rapidfire so common? less volume of fire puts more pressure on the dice you throw. should a unit really be able to wipe another unit from the board in a single volley? maybe? but it makes for crappy games.-That tension you get for last turn rolls/6th ed reserve rolls is a good aspect and keeps the vibe active and engaging, and I hope to capture that intensity by making the fewer dice rolls, more important.

GamerGuy




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay talk to me Dakka!!

sorry for the walls of text but looking for early feedback before I can hit the ground running again.... appears I stepped onto a moving treadmill last time....

Phase by phase player activation? alternating activations? what's the general consensus? 40k at it's current scale has a lot of waiting for your opponents moves... would alternating unit activation mitigate that at all?


Thoughts on Templates anyone??


GamerGuy

Well, that's more information on the design concept, but that still leaves the question of why you feel that a modified version of the 40k rules is the best option when 40k has such completely different design goals. Why not one of the 40k RPGs scaled up a bit to allow multiple models per player (the IG-focused RPG even has a very basic system for this as a starting point)? Why not a non-40k skirmish game re-skinned to use 40k IP? And you're still way ahead of where you should be, getting bogged down in details you shouldn't be thinking about yet. Stop thinking about the exact execution of things like movement distance or the AP system and get a clear definition of the bigger picture. You're still talking about the big picture like you aren't really sure exactly what you want, which means you're nowhere near ready to start defining specific rules.

Also, you have some conflicting goals happening here. You want a cheap and quick game where people do stupid things "because it's a laugh", but at the same time you want a high-investment game with tons of complex rules on things like environment detail and character development. Those two things aren't really compatible. A "for laughs" game needs to be very cheap and simple and take only a few minutes to play, preferably as a social event while doing something else, so that nobody feels like they have anything at stake and even if the stupid thing fails you can start a new game a few minutes later. A "D&D in 40k" miniatures game means investing lots of time and emotional energy into a character, spending a lot of time reading rules, etc. You just can't fit that stuff into a one-page rules sheet and 5-10 minutes of play time per game.

Finally, forget the wishful thinking about spending $30-40 to play a game and painting over beer. That level of money isn't going to buy you more than a handful of basic models with limited customization, and painting properly is always going to be a huge time sink that isn't compatible with "get drunk and hang out with friends".

Judging by everything you wrote so far, you're trying to reinvent the 40k wheel here. What you're describing is not alternative for regular 40k, not modern, not even 2nd ed, maybe Rouge Trader era. Your direct competition is Oldcromunda/Newcromunda/Inquisimunda/Inq28/Shadow War and most importantly new Kill Team that is just around the corner (old Kill Team is so flawed that it's no competition for anything).

What all those games have in common is 4x4 terrain heavy table. Your 2x2 suggestion makes it really an instant clash/instant death kind of encounter, even with 4"moves and 12" shooting, especially with "four trees one hill and 40$ spent" idea. Proper Necromunda table cost hell of a lot more than your gang models. For manouvering to matter that much on near bowling ball table you wound need Warmahordes or Shadespire style of gameplay, which are nothing like RPGs.

Last but not least - who do you adress this system to? Is it only for you and close friends or do you dream about making it community based, widespread phenomenon? If the former, then go do your research, play all those aformentioned games (and few other skirmishers like Infinity or Wolsung) and then borrow all you can or simply adapt one of those proven systems for your needs - will save you a lot of work. If it is the latter, then you have already started this backwards - for community endavours to succeed you first must have a community that want's the same thing and work together to achieve your common goals. And in times of Brand New 'cromunda and incoming new Kill Team you'll struggle to focus enough attention on homebrew project like this.

Quite frankly, there is nothing wrong with the current 40k core rules - most of the problems with 40k are in the Codices.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Quite frankly, there is nothing wrong with the current 40k core rules - most of the problems with 40k are in the Codices.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah no.

OK!! Hey there guys n gals

you're right in so much that I'm getting bogged down in details; core game design needs to be my priority. and further still, my objectives were contradictory. I've 2 gaming groups that both play very differently, but I was cooking up a dream of a system that caters to both well....I see now that that's an unrealistic expectation. In response to another post; this game is kinda just for me for now.... but if it got to a community level nothing would make me happier than being able to feed something I built back into Dakka; you guys have really helped so far.


-Forcing RPG style gameplay is maybe a pipe dream.... It's on the backburner, not being discarded.


Got a screaming headache and running on 2/3 hours sleep (uni finals)…. so progress if any, will be slow today.

Also shout out to the Blood for the blood god technical paint for my latest idea... won't impact game design so much as my personal play...


GamerGuy

 GamerGuy wrote:
Got a screaming headache and running on 2/3 hours sleep (uni finals)…. so progress if any, will be slow today.

Stop thinking about this in terms of days. Making a successful game is going to take you months, if not years. No measurable progress is going to occur in a single day, and you don't need to bother with updating on how one particular day might be slow.

Just keeping updates coming man, sometimes when you're following something online and theres nothing for a few days you get the whole "accepted defeat vibe"

The biggest advantage 40k offers to any game designer is the goals are set by a corporation, you already have the product and how it is sold, and the desired model count, the fact that 40K has a cast catalogue of iterations and versions that have tried a lot of things make them an ideal study in commercial game design and constrains.

I would suggest not work on details first but on the bigger picture, given the biggest hurdles are out, product, how it is packaged and what the desirable density of sales is are already figured out for you concentrate on the big picture how these will function practical on the table, their interactions are fine tuning, this can come later.

 GamerGuy wrote:
Just keeping updates coming man, sometimes when you're following something online and theres nothing for a few days you get the whole "accepted defeat vibe"

Not really, not if you understand the project. Not having a daily update on a months-long project means nothing to me, I won't even be checking such a slow project every day. But what it does do is encourage you to make the mistakes you initially made, getting way too far into irrelevant details before you're ready. Feeling like you need to make a daily update encourages you to rush ahead to small things just so you can say that you made progress. It might take you weeks to come up with an initial design document outlining your goals, but you can make a new cover save rule pretty quickly so you'd better do that today and have an "accomplishment" to post about. And then the more important, but more time consuming, goal keeps getting pushed aside in favor of having things to post about, guaranteeing that you continue to have it all backwards. It's a very counterproductive mindset and you really need to get away from it.

Is it worth mentioning the Heralds of Ruin Kill Team rules here? They seem to have a similar model count coupled with the idea of campaign driven narratives.

Might not be too much of a stretch to figure out what HoR is doing right vs what any other skirmish iteration of 40k (Necromunda and N17, Shadow War etc) is doing wrong?

I would agree that the current d6 system doesn't allow for enough statistical variation and needs to be overhauled in order to represent a more granular approach, which will be needed for terrain and missions to ahve the impact that you're looking for, with interactable objects etc.

Though you're a GW purist I'd really suggest looking to Infinity by Corvus Belli, I think that it may give you a good amount of ideas.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
The biggest advantage 40k offers to any game designer is the goals are set by a corporation, you already have the product and how it is sold, and the desired model count, the fact that 40K has a cast catalogue of iterations and versions that have tried a lot of things make them an ideal study in commercial game design and constrains.

The biggest disadvantage is that 40k has bloated so much from 2E / 3E, having to "support" so many different models, especially with a goal of "balance"

Yes, but having the design goals defined, especially for new designers is a boon.

Oh, I agree that having clear design goals is important.

So is actually applying them.

I don't know if I like about 15 models an army, some armies have a horde play style both in lore and game play (Imperial Guard, Orks, Tyraniids, etc) and it would be nice to still see that represented through game play.