"Putting Combat Resolution Table results ON the dice..." Topic

While idly browsing t'interweb for wargaming ideas I happened across this.

link

These Kriegsspiel Dice have the results from the CRT for the game printed on them, so the results for different ranges and weapons or targets can be read at a glance. The dice are in sets, depending on the odds at play, so they allow for a substantial amount of variation.

Has anyone ever experimented with this as an idea? With modern printers and commercially available blank dice they'd be pretty easy to knock up.

For me there's just something a bit arcane and retro about these that I find irresitable…

Nick

Doubt if my eyes are up to that much info in such a small space, but the idea appeals.

Not likely to be worth the trouble. Gamers will cheat just the same with such dice, especially as the guy across the table can't read them.

I use a method that has something of the same idea. I use 8 sided die for my naval games. The color of the face of the dice is the area on the target ship that is hit. The other side then takes these dice and rolls them and reads the number on the face and if he rolls less than or equal to the armor of that specific area he has turned the shell.

You'll want to look at the "Look, Sarge, No Charts" family of rules then. They make use of specially labeled dice for many of the games' mechanics:

link

Commands and Colors Ancients et al use icons. Sword = hit, shield = save etc.

Beat me to it. Richard Borg's various designs all do that now, and have done so for the last 10+ years. I like it!

I like the idea a lot though the exact design shown there is a little fiddly.

That map is a board game?

For the pictured game, I would need to use REALLY BIG DICE so my aging friends could read them. I've seen wooden cubes of the right size at craft stores, but I'm not sure where I'd want to roll them… maybe foam cubes would be a better idea.

The last time I experimented with game-specific dice I decided not to do that anymore. I might feel differently if I had a group of gamers dedicated to *any* game system enough to play it more than once annually, but I'm not interested in cluttering my dice collection with dice that are useful for only one game.

- Ix

Ottoathome needs to find different people to play with …

Did any of the naysayers bother to actually READ the article behind this?

The author played a game with them. Go and read his reaction.

Perhaps useful for people under age 40, or those with large magnifying glasses, or very strong eyeglass prescriptions.

With 10+ numbers per side, seems as if they could be more than a little confusing to newbies, too.

The point you must remember about the Prussian Kriegsspiel was that both the rules and the dice were for the use of the umpires, not the players, so some of the posts about cheating, being unable to see the dice across the table &c. aren't really valid criticisms.

An umpire familiar with the rules and the layout of the casualty numbers on the faces of the dice can easily resolve artillery fire, musketry or combat by rolling them on a surface/in a container immediately in front of him. If size is a problem, simply create larger dice – they are not going to hurtle across the tabletop, scattering figures and scenery!

72 year old eyes would lead to more irritation than ease.

Quick Intermediate Level Skirmish (QILS) does this in an intermediate way.

The pips on the dice for a figure are colored red, blue, and yellow for close combat, defensive, and ranged combat "strength". Combat (and other interactions) are conducted with opposed dice rolls. This results in each pair of dice (there are a few billion significantly tactically different designs) having a unique "combat resolution table. This performance space is magnified for figures that have multiple dice.

For multiple dice, you use the largest single die rolled for the color concerned, which limits power creep effects and limits the amount of in situ math.

It's easy to play and quick to adjudicate while still retaining enough flexibility to represent button counting level of detail if you want, but it is not necessary if you don't.

Re: Too Small

I thought exactly the same thing before we made these. I'm nearing 50 now and I think my eyes are nearing 70. :)

I was afraid I wouldn't be able to read the darned things. We tested some out at regular 16mm. I figured we'd have to up the size to make them readable.

I was surprised how wrong I was. No problem at all seeing them. We could make a bigger set but why?

They are much easier to read than the unit pieces. They aren't any harder to read a table with rows of numbers.

The article link is easy to miss. Here it is again:

link

It is an interesting read and goes into a lot more detail on what they are like to use. They do save a lot of time and mental fatigue from constantly looking up results.

They look too busy. I hate boardgames unit counters with all that stuff on them, and the dice are worse.

Looks a neat idea, similar to card driven games where the card has various data on it to drive different things.

Regards

David F Brown

Doubt if my eyes are up to that much info in such a small space

I would need to use REALLY BIG DICE so my aging friends could read them

Perhaps useful for people under age 40

72 year old eyes would lead to more irritation than ease.

I'm nearing 50 now and I think my eyes are nearing 70.

Just so we're clear, though… the "greying of the hobby" isn't really a thing, right? It's just a myth.

That looks more like "the greying of TMP".
TMP is not the hobby.