# Would 40K be better as a d10 system?



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

Think about it.

Think about how many 'unique' units share the same special rules, and more often the same stats. 

When a game grows and expands, it seems to me that the 'stats' get cramped and 'special rules' start popping up in order to make each unit a bit more unique than the last dozen or so released. Would a system with a bit more wiggle room make for a better game? Would it be more easily balanced? Would it add or detract character/flavor from the game? Is it at all likely to occur?

What are your opinions?


----------



## morfangdakka (Dec 31, 2006)

I think a d10 system would give you more options as you mentioned to expand the game as well as the units and special characters. However, GW is pushing for a younger crowd that can easily understand the game so they want to keep things as simple as possible. So I don't think we will see them go from d6 to a d10 system but it would be nice.


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

LOL... with the majority of the world being brought up learning the metric system of measurements, why would anything based upon the magic number '6' be any easier than '10'? 

In the states, well sure, but us US nuggets are a bit addled to start. We like the abuse.


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

Right now dice rolls are used for

Roll offs
Power selection (demonhosts etc)
reserve rolls
leadership tests
causing hits and wounds

Rolls Offs:
For roll offs its just whoever is higher or lower so D6 or D10 doesn't make a difference.

Power selections
Some units like possessed or Ork psychers use tables to generate powers with a D10. Either you go with a range so 1-2 equals said power in which case why go with a D10 or have in this case 10 powers which makes the chance of getting a certain power more random, making the unit less useful and thus less likely to be used. 

Reserve Rolls
Right now stuff like reserves and deep strikers come on on a 4+ on the second turn. Which means 50% chance to come on the table on the first chance. With a D10 that roll would start at 5 and go down (to have the same percentage). If you compare the rolls required on each turn the chance of having your unit come in is almost the same using either a D6 or a D10. Again in this case D10's don't really make a difference.

Leadership or Moral Tests
Average sum of 3 D10 is 11 which means almost everyone will be failing leaderships test on the current scale. Switching the scale to say 1 to 20 would seem like the best way to solve this with the average being 11. However, than someone with a perfect leadership would never fail a test unless there were modifiers where as now an 11 or twelve is a fail. So go with a range of 1 to 16 so there is always a chance to fail...that is an odd range and would be out of wack with the rest of the stats. Also leadership modifiers won't make much of a difference on the larger scale. The chance of failing a leadership test with a -2 modifier is smaller on a 1 to 20 scale than a 1 to 10 scale.

Causing Hits and Wounds

For ballistic skill a D10 would allow more diversity in the units although BS skill seems to be roughly race based. As BS is the average value of how well trained the soldiers of a specific army are. I think a specific BS value for an army with a +1 or -1 for heroes or special units covers the number of units in an army just fine. 

I think this is where a D10 system would be work great as this is where it seems like there should be wider range of fighting skills and toughness between units and races. Sisters having the same WS or S or T as guard seem odd. Although getting the D10 system to somewhat match the hit table and wound table would be really hard.

In the end I think the system does a pretty good job with D6 system at the moment. Although a D10 system may be better in some places I think it would definitely change the entire system and 40k would need a complete overhaul and not sure if it would make it more characteristic. Plus getting it balanced would not be an easy task at all. Thus I don't see it happening.


----------



## Lord Sinkoran (Dec 23, 2006)

don't really know never played a d10 system before


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

Keep in mind that we're not just taking about swapping the dice, but also reworking the stat system to match. Using d10's in a d6 structured game is pure nonsense.


----------



## Bishop120 (Nov 7, 2007)

D 100 system :biggrin:

Seriously.. I think a D100 system would be a much more dynamic game than D6. It would be harder to "power game" I think. 

I think it would also be easier to play with just 2 dice rather than having to scrounge up 50 or so D6 as well. Anything could be represented in the D100 system.


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

Well definitely would have to increase the stats to something like 1 to 10 or 1 to 100.


----------



## Metal_Ead (Jan 30, 2008)

D6 are cheap and easy to find. They get my vote. I play D&D sometimes and the different dice are a pain in the @$$!


----------



## Silb (Jan 28, 2008)

if the system ever changed, I doubt that games workshop would call the dice making people and say, "Hey guys, we changed the system for our game so we need you to change every kind of dice you have into 10 sided ones." 

More than 70% of my dice are collected from old board games and dice I have laying around my room. The lack of 10-sided dice in other games means that a ten-sided dice system would cause people to spend tons of money just to get like 30 10-sided dice so their orks can use close-combat attacks.


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

Yup.. and GW would LOVE that....


----------



## whocares (Jan 11, 2008)

Hespithe said:


> Think about it.
> 
> Think about how many 'unique' units share the same special rules, and more often the same stats.
> 
> ...


I like the idea, but it will never happen.


----------



## Morgal (Sep 26, 2007)

D6, but some units may require D12.
simply done using existing dice and easy to convert over.

lets us keep the d6 values but enables there to be 1/2 values if needed.


----------



## wetware (Dec 8, 2007)

Just a little detail that was bothering me... the average of 2d10 is 11. The average of 3d10 is 16.5

Since we've been yearning for the days of 40k yore, 2nd ed used different dice for different things, most notably the number of wounds a weapon inflicted on multi-wound models and armor penetration. So a power fist was something like AP 8 + D6 + D3 + D20, if I recall correctly.


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

Nah.... let's not try to make this too complicated. Imagine a system very similar to what we have now... but using d10's instead of d6's and with all of the stat's adjusted to fit. Ignore xd10 averages and such, as the stat adjustment would see to that.

Imagine... a Necron Warrior with different Str/To/Sv stats than a Space Marine. Both would still be hard models, but the differences between them would be more evident with a d10 stat system.


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

I think assuming everything like points, special rules and stats were evened out to fit the new system I think it would be a better 40k game. That being said, make sure everything was fair and even would be a serious overhaul. Fleet would definitely have to be overhauled, haha 10 inch fleet move, or maybe everyone's movement would be 10 inches....


----------



## Bishop120 (Nov 7, 2007)

This game is in serious need of a revamp to the stat and dice system tho.. whether it be D10 or D100 (2 D10) or even D 20.. It is needed. Im just tired of the same ole stats over and over again. T3, T4, T5, T7. Thats seriously what this game boils down to. Then we have the same armor saves... 2+, 3+, 4+.. anything else doesnt matter. Seriously .. .we need more diversity to keep the armies and this game in general interesting.


----------



## jakkie (Dec 21, 2007)

I think that this would be a good idea for some aspects of the game (Str, Toughness, weapon strengths0, but if you completly switched from D6 to D10, some of the psycick (crap spelling, i know) tests would not work as well. if you have 12 different consequences with D6, you'd either have to add another 8 (2D10) or take 2 away (D10).
this woud kind of screw up some of the rules.

other than that, i like the idea of going to D10 , but i dont think its a reality at the moment.


----------



## Triumph Of Man (Dec 27, 2007)

It's not going to happen IMO, and the reason for that is that D10 just aren't stable. Once they come to a stop, they're fairly precariously balanced on one face, if someone nudges the table or something just a little, you'll get a whole bunch of dice flipping faces.

Now that's not much of a problem in DnD when all eyes are on the one or two D10s, but trying to keep track of thirty of them would be impossible.

D6 win my vote due to the stability of the cube.


----------



## Dragonlover (Oct 17, 2007)

I vote D10s. They're just as stable as a D6, allow for more variation in stats, and more D10s means more incentive to play Storyteller systems!

And trust me on the stability issue. we've got a player who perpetually tries to fudge rolls in Mage, and it's really obvious when he tries it.

Dragonlover


----------



## Bishop120 (Nov 7, 2007)

Well as an argument for a D100 system (2 D10 style) you can compile the game down to stats and percentages and just roll the D100. Rather than rolling 50 D6 just roll the 2 D10.


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

I don't think there needs to be enough difference between units for a stats scale on 1 to 100. I always considered stats to be a general measurement of a units ability. Plus like someone above said, it allows the game to be more role playing which I don't want. If I want to play an rpg I will, but I don't and like my 40k as a battle game. Also trying to remember my WS 56 vs your WS 72 requires to roll a what on the hit table seems like way to much of a pain and would really slow the game down.


----------



## connor986 (Feb 14, 2008)

i think it would be more complicated as a d10 system, but i play another game called warmachines and thats a d10 system and it woks pretty well.


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

Warmachine is still a D6 system, I played it once and I remember only rolling 6 sided dice.


----------



## chrisman 007 (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm confused. Is D10 2 D6, or is it a ten sided dice? please explain people.


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

a d10 is just a 10-sided die.


----------



## DarknessDawns (Oct 21, 2007)

if they moved to d10 dont you think that they would have to change much more then we realise. 
like movement for example
lots of units roll a d6 for movement and in difficult terrain tests. they would have to change all units movement and that would mean they would have to upsize their standard table size to accomodate the new speedier units.
and there are many more changes like that.
personally i think it would be too large an overhaul to comprahend for such a poppular game that lots of people arnt going to want to learn it all agian
cheers


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

It's either that, or the game becomes stale. Changing the system to a more flexible one would also help to reduce the number of rules arguments, as their would be fewer 'special' rules to complicate things.


----------



## Dirge Eterna (Apr 30, 2007)

I dunno. I think the current special rules aren't actually all the same, but having only one makes it easier for people to get the rules. If every _Infiltrate_, or _Deep Strike_ unit had a different special rule, the rulebook would be a foot thick.

-Dirge


----------



## DarknessDawns (Oct 21, 2007)

i see logic in your answer dirge
i still think its too big of a change for gw to even consider


----------



## ServiceStud (Mar 1, 2008)

I registered just to be able to say this: I think it is an EXCELLENT idea to move to d10. Sure, things like _fleet_ should be reworked but seriously, is that such a big deal? I am positive something equally good could be cooked up. It really bothers be that so many factions are so alike in their basic stats.

Oh, and: Hi! I'm new! o/


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

I think a mixed dice system would be benefitial, eldar could benefit in one way while marines would benefit in another. Make it primarily a D6 but mix other dice in from D4, D6, D8, D10 and D12. do not know if you could get D20's to fit in there that well, but with a complete rewrite it might be possible.


----------



## revenant13 (Feb 15, 2008)

i think D10 would be fantastic, but there are too many idiots that wouldnt understand it or wouldnt want to understand it out of sheer laziness. would alow for more diverse stats and such though. how is it that a Grey Knight Grandmaster is only as good with a blade as a Grey Knight in power armor? the master is supposed to be like 4 times older than the regular knights. stats could range from like 1-20 or somethin. i guess i just feel that the stats need to be more diverse to really show how units differ in books and fluff and stuff. i also find it highly unlikely that Mephiston is only a hair weaker (str) than a bloodthirster.


----------



## StealingYerMail (Feb 23, 2008)

I like the d6 system. While I could see why people would want a d10 system, I think it's a little too much.

A little variation wouldn't hurt, but I really like the way the game works now. Plus as someone said, I always read the stat lines as a general measurement of the race more-so than the unit itself. And I just don't think taking variations down to very small levels is worth reworking the game for. 

I never really found the rules "hard to follow" or all that complex. I think a d10 would cause more complexity, since people would have to re-learn almost the whole game.

I just think that it'd cause some problems, and the problems it'd cause aren't worth it's benefits.


----------

