Switch Theme:

Would You Play 40k if d6's Were No Longer Used?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Would you Play 40k with Different Sided Dice?
Yes - I'd play it as regularly as I currently do
Yes - But likely not as much as I currently do
Yes - I'm too deep in the hole to stop playing now
Yes - But I wont pretend to like the new dice system
Uncertain / No Opinion
No - New dice would put me off completely
No - I don't play regularly now anyway
No - I don't play dice games, I play card games

View results
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 us
Longtime Dakkanaut





As it says.
Would you still play 40k if the dice system changed from d6's (six sided dice) to another kind, like d8, d10, d12, or even d20's?

Let's put this to rest. There's some that believe 40k's problems would evaporate if the number of dice sides would increase.

Keep in mind the last time you were at a game store and saw packs of d8s and above on sale in the same colors as the dice that you currently use, if that matters to you.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Assuming that the game is still fun and not FUBAR, which I doubt changing dice would do, I’d play as much as always.
Then again, I play D&D as a DM, so I have lots of dice of all kinds.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

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

The only change to dice that would put me off would be a shift to bespoke ones that I would need to purchase exclusively for 40k. Keeping up with the rules churn is enough of a drain on the budget that if I needed to pick up extra dice sets on top of of would be quite irksome. Especially if they were army specific.

Assuming they don’t screw up some other way when they change the rules.

   
Made in se
Dakka Veteran





Where's the option to vote "Yes - I'd even prefer it with different sided dice"?

5500 pts
6500 pts
7000 pts
9000 pts
13.000 pts
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Biloxi, MS USA

Where's the "Yes because I play for the setting and story not the rules" option?

You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie
The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






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.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 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.
I mean, the idea (as far as I see) is that use by a d10 or d12 would let you roll less dice.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

 JNAProductions wrote:
 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.
I mean, the idea (as far as I see) is that use by a d10 or d12 would let you roll less dice.


How would it accomplish that? I've still got to roll to hit/wound with each of my models....

Changing dice sizes won't get rid of 40ks problems.
All that'll happen is NEW problems will arise.

Anyways, if the game is fun enough? I'll play whatever the dice size is.
Likewise, whatever the dice used, if it reaches a point where I'm not having enough fun I'll stop playing.

   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 JNAProductions wrote:
 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.
I mean, the idea (as far as I see) is that use by a d10 or d12 would let you roll less dice.
I'm not even sure that's what people want from it, and mathematically speaking it seems like D10s with reduced rolling would make for less granularity.

Anyways, not trusting what comes out of the poll.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Yeah, where's the option for "As long as it's fun"?
   
Made in us
Committed Chaos Cult Marine





 Insectum7 wrote:
Anyways, not trusting what comes out of the poll.
This 3000.
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




I tend to think of the change in dice as a theoretical than actual desire.
What could be done with a change, and a desire to see anything done about the faults in 40k.

You can do a lot with the d6 if you know what you are aiming for.
And that’s where I think the desire comes from for bigger dice, GW doesn’t use what is has now well. So a easy fix would be to make dice bigger.
Change some things around to make it work kinda like now and good enough.
Won’t fix the big issues plaguing the system, but it may at least spread out some of them.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

Apple fox wrote:
I tend to think of the change in dice as a theoretical than actual desire.
What could be done with a change, and a desire to see anything done about the faults in 40k.

You can do a lot with the d6 if you know what you are aiming for.
And that’s where I think the desire comes from for bigger dice, GW doesn’t use what is has now well. So a easy fix would be to make dice bigger.
Change some things around to make it work kinda like now and good enough.
Won’t fix the big issues plaguing the system, but it may at least spread out some of them.


So if GW doesn't use what it's currently got well enough, how would bigger dice be an easy fix?? What makes you think they'd use bigger dice ranges any better?
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




ccs wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
I tend to think of the change in dice as a theoretical than actual desire.
What could be done with a change, and a desire to see anything done about the faults in 40k.

You can do a lot with the d6 if you know what you are aiming for.
And that’s where I think the desire comes from for bigger dice, GW doesn’t use what is has now well. So a easy fix would be to make dice bigger.
Change some things around to make it work kinda like now and good enough.
Won’t fix the big issues plaguing the system, but it may at least spread out some of them.


So if GW doesn't use what it's currently got well enough, how would bigger dice be an easy fix?? What makes you think they'd use bigger dice ranges any better?


That was the point, we can discuss how it could be used. But any issue that GW won’t fix anyway, won’t be fixed by upping the dice size.
But could spread things out a bit.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 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.

Pretty much this. I already find it awkward to roll 40 dice when my guardians or swooping hawks shoot. I usually break that up into two rolls of 20. If we switched to rolling d12s, I'd probably end up breaking it up into four rolls of 10. :\

Personally, it's not that I'm opposed to changing die size so much as I just don't think it's the magic bullet some people pitch it as. It gives you room to bring back stackable to-hit modifiers, but you'd also have to consider things like:
* What formula do you use to determine to-wound rolls now that the dice have twice as many sides.
* Do you reduce the number of shots/attacks to make dice rolling more wieldy, and if so, what are the consequences of that?
* To-hit modifiers of +/- 1 are less effective than they used to be. So which modifiers (if any) do you bump up to +/- 2? You probably want to do that sort of thing sparingly or you defeat the point of increasing die size, but how comfortable are you halving the usefulness of everyone's -1 to hit rules or MWBD?

Personally, if I had to deal with all that to facilitate changing die size, I'd probably be looking at a ground-up rework. And at that point, you have a lot more to discuss than just die size.

tldr; I'd still play, but I feel defenders of the die size change tend to overestimate the upsides and skim over the downsides.


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in gb
Leader of the Sept







Changing the dice type would enable a fundamental change in the combat resolution. The dice rolls are used to determine if one model or unit can make another model or unit combat ineffective, and therefore the marker be removed from the board. There are ways to run that such that players don’t need to roll 40+ dice per unit shooting phase. Maybe moving down to Stargrunt or horizon wars style minimalist opposed rolls is too far, given that there is a visceral thrill from rolling quite a few dice at once, but moving to different dice types could be used to enable a happy medium.

Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!

Terranwing - w3;d1;l1
51st Dunedinw2;d0;l0
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut



Bamberg / Erlangen

Just using different dice doesn't really matter to me. It depends on the implementation and how it affects the fun of the game.

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Flinty wrote:
Changing the dice type would enable a fundamental change in the combat resolution. The dice rolls are used to determine if one model or unit can make another model or unit combat ineffective, and therefore the marker be removed from the board. There are ways to run that such that players don’t need to roll 40+ dice per unit shooting phase. Maybe moving down to Stargrunt or horizon wars style minimalist opposed rolls is too far, given that there is a visceral thrill from rolling quite a few dice at once, but moving to different dice types could be used to enable a happy medium.

This gets to the heart of the issue for me. Just changing dice does nothing in itself, but if GW use that change to implement fundamental changes to how attack resolution works then it may be a good thing. It could also be terrible, for many different reasons. Many games use different types of dice to represent the effectiveness of units. Stargrunt, IIRC, used a pretty straightforward "bigger dice means better unit" approach, but other games use custom dice with different frequency and type of results to represent the same thing. These approaches could work for 40k, but the key thing would be exactly how its implemented.

The poll lacks any of this context, so it's fairly useless as a data gathering exercise.
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





Well depends on rules but idea of buying big pile of new dices doesn't appeal but not end of the world.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





Yes, but the problem with 40k is not the d6.....
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





Slipspace wrote:
 Flinty wrote:
Changing the dice type would enable a fundamental change in the combat resolution. The dice rolls are used to determine if one model or unit can make another model or unit combat ineffective, and therefore the marker be removed from the board. There are ways to run that such that players don’t need to roll 40+ dice per unit shooting phase. Maybe moving down to Stargrunt or horizon wars style minimalist opposed rolls is too far, given that there is a visceral thrill from rolling quite a few dice at once, but moving to different dice types could be used to enable a happy medium.

This gets to the heart of the issue for me. Just changing dice does nothing in itself, but if GW use that change to implement fundamental changes to how attack resolution works then it may be a good thing. It could also be terrible, for many different reasons. Many games use different types of dice to represent the effectiveness of units. Stargrunt, IIRC, used a pretty straightforward "bigger dice means better unit" approach, but other games use custom dice with different frequency and type of results to represent the same thing. These approaches could work for 40k, but the key thing would be exactly how its implemented.

The poll lacks any of this context, so it's fairly useless as a data gathering exercise.


Affecting probabilities does something. Makes modifiers less big deal. Now +-1 is big thing. On d10 effect is much less so.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Anyways, not trusting what comes out of the poll.
This 3000.

Why? Are people incapable of reading the question correctly?
   
Made in gb
Stealthy Grot Snipa






UK

Played 2nd Ed a few nights back and D10s, D20s, D8s & D4s all made an appearance.. lots of things still clunky about 40k but the dice were not a big deal, plus with dice apps you can instantly access all sorts of dice for free

Skinflint Games- war gaming in the age of austerity

https://skinflintgames.wordpress.com/

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




EviscerationPlague wrote:
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Anyways, not trusting what comes out of the poll.
This 3000.

Why? Are people incapable of reading the question correctly?

The question is too vague to trust the validity poll answers. Is this literally just about taking the current system and changing from a D6 to something else? Or is it about a change in the resolution mechanics that necessitates using different dice?

This is all discussed in the responses above, so I have no idea why you're confused by the post you're replying to.
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






It’s not the dice. It’s how they’re used.

I’ve no particular opinion beyond that. If it’s just D10, 12 or 20 etc to be “special”, I don’t see the point.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





tneva82 wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
 Flinty wrote:
Changing the dice type would enable a fundamental change in the combat resolution. The dice rolls are used to determine if one model or unit can make another model or unit combat ineffective, and therefore the marker be removed from the board. There are ways to run that such that players don’t need to roll 40+ dice per unit shooting phase. Maybe moving down to Stargrunt or horizon wars style minimalist opposed rolls is too far, given that there is a visceral thrill from rolling quite a few dice at once, but moving to different dice types could be used to enable a happy medium.

This gets to the heart of the issue for me. Just changing dice does nothing in itself, but if GW use that change to implement fundamental changes to how attack resolution works then it may be a good thing. It could also be terrible, for many different reasons. Many games use different types of dice to represent the effectiveness of units. Stargrunt, IIRC, used a pretty straightforward "bigger dice means better unit" approach, but other games use custom dice with different frequency and type of results to represent the same thing. These approaches could work for 40k, but the key thing would be exactly how its implemented.

The poll lacks any of this context, so it's fairly useless as a data gathering exercise.


Affecting probabilities does something. Makes modifiers less big deal. Now +-1 is big thing. On d10 effect is much less so.

Right, but like I said above:

Personally, it's not that I'm opposed to changing die size so much as I just don't think it's the magic bullet some people pitch it as. It gives you room to bring back stackable to-hit modifiers, but you'd also have to consider things like:
* What formula do you use to determine to-wound rolls now that the dice have twice as many sides.
* Do you reduce the number of shots/attacks to make dice rolling more wieldy, and if so, what are the consequences of that?
* To-hit modifiers of +/- 1 are less effective than they used to be. So which modifiers (if any) do you bump up to +/- 2? You probably want to do that sort of thing sparingly or you defeat the point of increasing die size, but how comfortable are you halving the usefulness of everyone's -1 to hit rules or MWBD?

Personally, if I had to deal with all that to facilitate changing die size, I'd probably be looking at a ground-up rework. And at that point, you have a lot more to discuss than just die size.

Even reducing the impact of +-1 isn't inherently an entirely good change.

Slipspace seems to be making the case that using different dice could/should be part of an overhaul to the system. Which, fair enough. But overhauling the system implies that there are fundamental changes that make it impossible to discuss the merits of die size without knowing what those changes are.

"You should let me add a moonroof to your car. It will make it way easier to navigate your course using the stars."
"I mean, moon roofs are neat, but I don't really use stellar navigation when I'm driving. And how would that fix my flat tire?"
"Oh, I replaced the flat tires with floatation devices and a rudder. Your car is a boat now, so I really think the moon roof is a good idea."
"Wait, I have so many more questions."
"About the moon roof?"
"I mean... We can come back to the moon roof."


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in gb
Excited Doom Diver





Yeah, I don't think I've seen anyone argue to just change the dice size - it's always been suggested as one element of broader changes.

So this poll is already missing a key piece of context.

Also, reading the OP... This looks more like a poll raised to push a specific position rather than a poll intended to gather meaningful data from a neutral starting point.

Would I play 40K if the dice changed? Yes, absolutely. I've played every edition since 2nd, and as long as the game is vaguely recognisable, I don't think a change like dice size could stop me from playing entirely.

Would I play more than now, the same, or less? That depends entirely on the framework. If GW moved to D10s and used the move to streamline the game in other ways, almost certainly more. If basically nothing changed except for the need to use more awkward dice (but with the same number of rolls and re-rolls), almost certainly less.

In the absence of further context, I have chosen to assume that the rules are tweaked to be a bit more streamlined / use the extra granularity when first updated, but that GW still fail to resist the temptation to add rules bloat and needless complexity, just like they have done since... about halfway through 5th? On that basis, voted about the same.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/16 17:26:01


 
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dreadnought




San Jose, CA

The dice used is secondary to the actual gameplay, which is like 10th on the list of stuff I play 40k for...

Would the game be any better if the added in differing dice? Possibly. GW has a track record of jacking stuff up, so chances are more likely that it would be just as fethed as it currently is.

If they brought in Apoc style wound/damage system(I like the game a bunch) it could help mitigate some of the stupidity. But....
   
Made in ca
Veteran Wolf Guard Squad Leader






Type of dice isn't the reason I play the game, it's not important to me. Would be tough rolling 20 d20's at a time though.

Wolfspear's 2k
Harlequins 2k
Chaos Knights 2k
Spiderfangs 2k
Ossiarch Bonereapers 1k 
   
Made in si
Foxy Wildborne







I don't play it currently, if they did a full rules revamp I would try it.

Posters on ignore list: 36

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: