Switch Theme:

Opposed to hit rolls  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

So, I've seen people discuss using D10s or D12s to increase the granularity of the game. I'm not sure the game needs that level of granularity, but if a change were to be implemented for more granularity, what about opposed hit rolls?

So, obviously, WS would be compared to WS like in older editions. BS would have to be compared to a new stat, AG, Agility. This could use the same chart as the wound chart, but I think it'd be better with a +1/-1 chart, and the wound chart would be changed to match. I feel that there'd be no need for 2 different charts.

Obviously, this would have to be implemented with major changes to the game, and it wouldn't just be a slot in, but it would allow for the granularity of a D10 or D12, while still keeping the D6.

Are there any glaring flaws here I'm missing?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/26 23:56:38


"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Rhinox Rider




Sir Heckington wrote:
So, I've seen people discuss using D10s or D12s to increase the granularity of the game. I'm not sure the game needs that level of granularity, but if a change were to be implemented for more granularity, what about opposed hit rolls?

So, obviously, WS would be compared to WS like in older editions. BS would have to be compared to a new stat, AG, Agility. This could use the same chart as the wound chart, but I think it'd be better with a +1/-1 chart, and the wound chart would be changed to match. I feel that there'd be no need for 2 different charts.

Obviously, this would have to be implemented with major changes to the game, and it wouldn't just be a slot in, but it would allow for the granularity of a D10 or D12, while still keeping the D6.

Are there any glaring flaws here I'm missing?


I think opposed rolls are great. The old hit chart never took advantage of it, never gave much defensive boost.

How would you handle the difference between using the ws stats opposing each other compared to a bs and AG stat opposing each other? opposed ws means you can potentially get a double bonus from having a ws advantage - if you don't stagger the effects on the chart, then having a higher ws means both an offensive and defensive advantage which combine to be potentially overwhelming. having separate offensive and defensive stats like your shooting scenario would mean balancing the chart differently.


uh I also have an idea for bolting sort of parallel opposed stats to the current game. It's that if you have higher attacks than your opponent, you get an extra -1 ap to your shooting attack, and when they shoot you, if you're in cover, you get a 5++ after your normal save.

It's not opposed rolls at all, it's a way to not modify the codexes at all but to add granularity by having A) a defensive stat that interacts with your opponent's stat and B) more than one stat that effects the shooting phase.




and there is one specific guy on who will take over your thread and post your ear off about his very specific, detailed ideas for a totally new game if you let him - don't encourage his garbage you can just read his old posts.

   
Made in ca
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

Hmm. That would be harder to balance.

Alternatively, you could have AG be the stat to compare to for both BS and WS? An opponent that's extremely agile would be harder to hit at ranged and in CC, while something like a tank is going to be just as easy to hit for shooting and CC.

"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

Or you could play WMH, where units have a “Defence” stat that you have to meet or exceed in order to score a hit.
   
Made in ca
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

 greatbigtree wrote:
Or you could play WMH, where units have a “Defence” stat that you have to meet or exceed in order to score a hit.


I've looked at WMH, and I'm annoyed at being forced to take a named character. (iirc, I could be wrong.)

Also, extremely helpful.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/10/27 01:07:02


"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Looking at another system isn't a bad idea. See what works and what doesn't.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in ca
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

Oh no definitely. I intend to look at it as soon as I can, but it sounded like they were just saying to play a different system, not just look at what works in it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/27 01:16:52


"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Rhinox Rider




Sir Heckington wrote:
Hmm. That would be harder to balance.

Alternatively, you could have AG be the stat to compare to for both BS and WS? An opponent that's extremely agile would be harder to hit at ranged and in CC, while something like a tank is going to be just as easy to hit for shooting and CC.


It would definitely be easier to balance and also simpler for players to use, because it'd be the same chart. Agility would definitely be a big part of surviving a close combat fight, it's different than attacking someone, so you could definitely consolidate them from that perspective.

I have a couple of separate thoughts.

One is that personally I don't think agility has as much to do with surviving shooting compared to surviving hand to hand. Conceivably someone like a harlequin dancer or some types of tyranid are in constant motion, at least as long as they are moving across the board, and also making very large and inefficient motions like somersaults that make them unpredictable. Most units are probably either standing still in cover, or following the terrain from point a to be, however.

In Flames of War the main difference between infantry units in an army is how hard they are to hit - 3+, 4+, or 5+. That's a flat roll with no reference to the shooter's BS, probably because they're 15mm models with whole squads on a single base, so they don't have the scale to do opposed rolls.

In that case, since they are all human troops from wwII, the defensive score has to do with whether they're conscripts, regular troops, or veterans. I think "hard to hit" has less to do with agility and more to do with when they choose to stick their head out of cover to fire, and that's not a physical stat it's an experience one.


Another thought is that yes, you could use weapon skill vs weapon skill, without a separate defensive close combat skill. The thing is that you don't have to use it to see if you hit, you can use it to see which one of the two models hits. In the GW Lord of the Rings game, the models didn't attack past each other like in warhammer, you compared scores and rolled a die to see which of the two models was going to do damage, and the other model just lost the fight for that turn. One interesting thing that meant was that you have very few scenarios where both models failed to do damage, which can happen in 40k.
   
Made in us
Inspiring SDF-1 Bridge Officer





Mississippi

Don't we basically already have that with the different traits that are -1/-2 to hit at 12"+?

Wouldn't be better to expand that current system to +1/-1 to be hit in melee or ranged? Something like, for example:

Harlequin Agility: Lithe and acrobatic even more so than their Aeldari counterparts, Harlequins are extremely hard targets to hit in melee combat or draw a bead on with ranged weaponry. When targeted with a ranged attack, opponents suffer a -1 penalty to hit. Likewise, opponents suffer a -1 penalty to hit them in melee combat.

The basic bonuses to hit are already factored in by the unit's Weapon and Ballistic skills, you only need to have the skilled unit inflict a penalty to BE hit if they are exceptionally skilled; A skilled attacker attempting to hit a skilled defender will cancel each other out.

It never ends well 
   
Made in au
Ork-Hunting Inquisitorial Xenokiller





D12 etc would be good but never gunna happen (why talk about it???)

Lost your argument right there talking about different dice (never gunna happen...)

also others talking about the old system...

Changing -1 to hit to something else maybe, or making it not able to affect hit rolls etc but they are already compensating for that so 40k will not change that this addition (with alot of re-rolls and +1 to hit etc).

Granted it was a stupid move for army wide benifits of -1 to hit, but it would be hard to change (change it to +1 cover, but there is already conflicting with the same ability).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/27 09:48:30


14k Generic Space Marine Chapters
20k Deathwatch
10k Sisters of Battle
3k Inquisition
4k Grey Knights
5k Imperial Guard
4k Harlequins
8k Tau



 
   
Made in us
Norn Queen






Just a little nit pick here.

An opposed roll is when each party makes a roll and the higher or winner gets to do their thing.

Like, I attack, you dodge, we both roll. If I win the attack hits. If you win the dodge is successful and I miss.

Comparing attributes to find a target number is not an opposed roll. It's just a roll with a target number that is based on something other than the units own stat line.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
 
   
Made in us
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

 Lance845 wrote:
Just a little nit pick here.

An opposed roll is when each party makes a roll and the higher or winner gets to do their thing.

Like, I attack, you dodge, we both roll. If I win the attack hits. If you win the dodge is successful and I miss.

Comparing attributes to find a target number is not an opposed roll. It's just a roll with a target number that is based on something other than the units own stat line.


I was not aware of that, thank's for clearing that up.

"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: