Why only d6 and d10 for attack and penetration?

[llre]

Or will other die types be added later?

Robert

[warchariot]

I think it was to keep it simple and the ranges, penetration close to each other. The way he has solved the need for a d8 and d12 is by adding the FC as a plus to direct fire weapons along with modifers for penetration and to-hit dice. I believe a d20 to be way out of the range band and would make d6 weapons very poor. And with armor topping out at 10, d20 for penetration would be more powerful than any other weapon.

How after all that, Dread will say it's possible

[unclejoe]

Also, adding in larger dice types leads to more randomization and I think one of his design goals was to make it less of a dice-fest. Right now, within closer engagement ranges you can get fairly predictable amounts of hits. If you open up to larger dice ranges, it leaves it open for more luck to creep in (and there is already a fair amount of it due the crit roles).

[TheDreadnought]

I actually started out with d6, d8, d10, and d12. . . but playtesting and market research showed people preferred fewer dice. I couldn't collapse it to just a d6 or just a d10 without lots more modifiers so I used both.

Also, there were a lot more modifiers & rerolls on attack dice. . . but it just made a mess of things. . . and the laws of game design dictate there has to be a big payoff in gameplay/enjoyment for added complexity. . . so most of those modifiers got the boot also.

So now just d6 & d10 with a minimum of modifiers in the interest of fast and enjoyable gameplay. Essentially we've moved the tactical decision making out of the realm of the dice that are being used and into what happens on the tabletop.

That's the way dad did it, that's the way America does it. . . and it's worked out pretty well so far.

[warchariot]

"That's the way dad did it, that's the way America does it. . . and it's worked out pretty well so far. "

I'm standing and saluting as I read this! LOL