Dice systems - d12 v d6

[Valkyrion]

Firstly, no need to be so dismissive, my opinion and your courtesy hurts no one.  Secondly, that one single thought isn't exactly the problem, is it? Thirdly I'm not flat out refusing anything, I'm joining in a discussion. 

 

To clarify my point, I mean that 3+ on a D6 on average is fine with regards the hit roll. This is a wargame, things need to be hit, things need to die. My only input, mild as it was yet worthy of such condescension, was that GW could open the door to D12 saves so as to make AP carry more meaning. 

 

 

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Just going to give this a little nudge, because we aren't there yet but I don't want to see an interesting discussion flame out.

 

1.  Please remember to be civil.  Discuss and challenge each others points, not each other.

 

2.  Conversely, people are allowed to have opinions you may not share.  Describing a rule as "stupid" doesn't mean people who support that rule are stupid.   

 

So far, none of the challenges on the positions held by other posters have been, in my view, attacks on those posters themselves.  Let's keep it that way.

 

Dr. R.

Edited yesterday at 08:20 PM by Dr_Ruminahui

[Xenith]

D12's wouldn't work as tourney try-hards would get custom dice where the 1s and 7s looked very similar and just pick up all the 1s. It's hard enough to tell with just pips on some marbled d6's. 

 

I think we do need to go back to a comparative WS system though. No way should a guardsman hit Jain zar 50% of the time. Even the same as heresy works - lower WS = 5+,  half the WS is a 6+ to hit. 

 

With that you can make some characters more resilient without making up special rules. 

[phandaal]

23 hours ago, HeadlessCross said:

Just carry a small bag? Like, what packaging do you specifically need?  I also found 50 d12s on this website for cheap, so availability is clearly false assuming you're not from the 80's and have access to the internet.

 

Ah, a website sells them. That certainly settles global manufacturing, shipping, retail, and the controversial question of whether cubes stack better than dodecahedrons. 

[jaxom]

I’ve played around with a few variations of melee systems when I’ve been working on stuff. Here’s some of the thoughts I’ve had based on that.

 

Comparative WS works well with a limited number of set profiles in a game (eg Horus Heresy).

 

Comparative hits cancelling out can work, but slows things down significantly when both sides are rolling high volumes of dice.

A universal “parry” system works well, and the best version I playtested would take some explaining (2nd post?).

Initiative (as it was) is similar to comparative weapon skill in my opinion.

 

Initiative works well in a psuedo-simultaneous system where casualties are removed at end of turn. Initiative provides a differential to remove a limited number of casualties “before” they can act.

 

 

[HeadlessCross]

5 hours ago, phandaal said:

 

Ah, a website sells them. That certainly settles global manufacturing, shipping, retail, and the controversial question of whether cubes stack better than dodecahedrons. 

Why do they need to perfectly stack?

[Antarius]

We know they wanted to do special dice (d8, d12) for Warcry and the idea was nixed due to production costs, so it seems unlikely they would do it for the flagship games (plus, whether you agree or not, it will likely be seen as a barrier to entry).

 

The discussion can still be interesting, of course.

[Xenith]

14 hours ago, Valkyrion said:

GW could open the door to D12 saves so as to make AP carry more meaning

My thought in this is that with save modifiers you don't actually need invulnerable saves. Having a model with a 1+ save is just as effective and identical mechanically as a model with 2+ and 4++ against ap3 weapons. 

[Mogger351]

1 hour ago, Xenith said:

My thought in this is that with save modifiers you don't actually need invulnerable saves. Having a model with a 1+ save is just as effective and identical mechanically as a model with 2+ and 4++ against ap3 weapons. 

That's a good point and I like that train of thought. I guess again, as with the other stats, you'd need to functionally downgrade a lot of stuff.

[Antarius]

Part of the point of inv saves is that they sort of “cap” the modifier, though (the 1+ save in the above example would be different against a weapon with ap4 or more, for example). So there is a difference, but whether that difference is a good thing or not is probably subjective (personally, I think invulnerable saves make a lot of sense for force fields, Daemons and the like).

[Xenith]

I'm of the opinion that a lascannon and volcano cannon shouldn't be equally survivable by a terminator! You can put the lascannon at -3ap and the volcano at like -7ap, or -10 ap or whatever you like, with no invulnerable they will have a different effect on a 1+ or even 0+ save. Old fantasy had this, a 1 always failed, but saves better than 2+ effectively ignored some ap. 

 

I recall in 2nd ed, with modifiers, terminators rolled their 3+ save on 2d6, so even with -4 ap they still had a good chance of saving!

Edited 1 hour ago by Xenith