"Expanded more granualar d6 suggestion" Topic

The debate over which dice are "better" rages on but the fact remains that even most casual gamers have multiple d6's handy.
Here is a suggestion to make the d6 have more than 6 results. If you are rolling "to hit/wound/succeed, etc", add a .5 to the possible results, like so:
1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5.
The whole numbers (1,2,3…) are rolled as usual. As an example, if the target number, say a 4.5 or higher, is needed, then:
1, 2, 3: fail
4: needs a second roll of 4, 5, or 6 to succeed.
5 or 6: succeed
The number of second rolls is quite low in practice so things move along fairly quickly. However, a little more thought is required when adding and subtracting modifiers.

Your thoughts?

You could obviously speed this up by rolling two D6 in different colours.

And if you MIGHT need to roll a second dice, why not just roll it anyway? 2D6 gives you possible results in the range 2 to 12 (if you sum the scores) and 36 possible results if you distinguish by colour.

I'd rather use a D12 for that level of granularity. One thing I like about D6's is that they are quick and simple: I'd rather keep them that way.

Yeah, this reminds me of some of my own "clever" dice ideas, where the proposal ends up more complicated than the thing I was trying to to simplify.

andy

2D6, D20, or 2D10 (D100) if more granularity is desired.

Yes, having learned to game with polyhedral dice, I'm always astonished by game designers who insist on only D6s.

As noted, if your spread is this:

===2D6 read D6 + low/high===
1: D6:1 + D6:low = (1/6)/2 = 1/12 ~ 8.33%
1.5: D6:1 + D6:high
2: D6:2 + D6:low
6.5: D6:6 + D6:high

You have 12 cases evenly distributed. That really could most easily be simulated by using a D12.

If you are one of those who insists on only D6s, since for many of your results, you're throwing 2 dice, you could throw them together, with the second die a different color and only referenced if the first requires it. This would speed up play but takes some getting used to.

Or, having recognized that you are committed to throwing 2 dice, you could throw out the low/high mechanic and just read them 2-12. People are used to that (which is the argument for insisting on only D6s in the first place, right?). Now, you only have 11 results but you do get a bell curve, which a lot of people feel belongs in a proper simulation. The extreme results (very low and very high) are close to the percentage you're proposing:

===2D6 read 2-12===
2-3: 1/12 ~ 8.33%
4: 1/12 ~ 8.33%
5: 1/9 ~11.11%
…
9: 1/9 ~11.11%
10: 1/12 ~ 8.33%
11-12: 1/12 ~ 8.33%

Acharnement suggests a variant of the d12. I prefer a d12 to a d6, but the math is sound. It allows gradation as fine as 8.3% if you use a target number model.

For finer gradations, Doug Larsen suggests gradations of 2.8% can be achieved with only 2d6…

TMP link

If your game adopts a CRT or some other type or Results Matrix, you simply read one die as the vertical axis and the other as the horizontal axis.

YMMV, but I consider a basic principal of wargame design to be "maximize thinking about the tactical problem, minimize thinking about mechanics"

Rolling a die and interpreting the result is far enough from the tactics without adding intervening computations.

I don't see doubling the number of dice rolls required as a "solution."

As for rolling them together, as I mentioned in the other thread, rolling pairs requires color-coded dice and is not practical once you start making more than two rolls at the same time.

Finally, not a big believer in CRTs. Really just not a fun mechanic IMO. Target numbers are a better way to go since they provide instant gratification/excitement vs. "Oh, wow. . . that might be good. Let me check the table.)

I noted Doug's CRT solution expecting some reactions. Needless to day, I agree with Lentulus and TheDreadnought. If you desire gradations higher than 16.6%, the most elegant solution is to adopt a dice size higher that a d6.

Target numbers or opposing rolls are dramatic and enjoyable when gaming. CRT's have a spotty record.

I say these things, but I illogically use the d6 when writing games at every opportunity. Ditto Bird made a great comment on anther thread about the tactile qualities of the d6 being superior to polyhedral dice. Perhaps the perfect dice would be a d40 that sounded and rolled like a d6. :)

Thanks everyone for the answers- quite a variety of thoughts.
Personally, I prefer using all the polyhedrals and am always interested in moving beyond the d12 to the d14, etc.
I find the percentile dice a little sterile if that makes any sense. As I stated, the d6 is the most common die that is at hand in almost anyone's collection of games. I posted the idea only because of the d6's ubiquitousness.
I use the "d6.5" for multiple dice throws, for example, a unit of 12 models trying to hit a foe. There are not many second rolls, so it doesn't appreciably slow the game down.
I came up with the idea because of frustration with the GW "to hit" charts for Warhammer, 40K, etc. It allowed me to re-write the chart so it included what I thought was a better gradation of numbers.
Onward!