only a personal wishlist of changes for next edition

[pnkdth]

On 8/25/2023 at 2:55 PM, Mikosan said:

I keep seeing people saying that the double forces a player to sit through two turns of doing nothing, and can't help but honestly wonder if that isn't part of the reason the double is such a problem in these experiences?  In the hero phase you have heroic actions, unbinding and dispelling, moving endless spells in the movement phase you have redeploy, then there is all out defense and all out attack, alternating combat activations, unleash hell, monstrous rampages, inspiring presence, battle shock, rally not to mention the armies that have ways to charge out of turn, shoot(like the gryph hounds warning cry) strike first etc....   There always seems to me to be plenty to think about, decide on, and roll for in my experiences.   The days of literally doing nothing but rolling armour saves and removing models was actually how it was in Fantasy Battles and the IGOUGO system, which is weird because so many folks want to bring elements of that game into AoS, which I would prefer not.  I'm glad the Old World is coming back for those folks though.  

The point is, those are all reactive, not active, choices. A double turn makes you go through yet another turn of not making any active choices.

You can build your list and play with it in mind but you're still having to wait even longer before getting to activate your army. Some armies have out of turn movement but that doesn't fix things for those who have not. One solution would be universal reaction moves but since some armies already have them this would require overhauls of said factions, otherwise it might create more issues than it solves.

In other words, I do not think the priority roll is going anywhere. I just think there should more active ways to reposition, e.g. if you take the double turn the opponent can make a full normal move with one unit (replaces 'redeploy') + get the first combat activation regardless of any special rules with 'always strikes first' to represent the army not just standing there taking it and the army taking the double being fatigued. Unleash hell remains as is. This adds an element of extra consideration of taking a double and opens up strategic plays based on not taking it.

There are lots of other ways of exploring this, for sure, and the short of it is I want to see there being more tangible and active benefits for the player who gets double turned.

[Nos]

On 8/17/2023 at 8:22 AM, Beliman said:

I like some of your points, but not sure about others (magic after moving, mw with magic, ranged points reduction, etc...). But what I really want is a solid game structure. Wall of text incoming:

• Polish basic concepts and core mechanics:
  • Write a "Bravery check" mechanic and use it when it matters (magic phase, some terror shenanigans, battleshock etc...). No need to write each time a bravery check is needed to "roll 2D6 and add X, if the result is more than bla bla bla).
  • Critical Hit and Critical Wound: Unmodified 6 to hit/wound always succeed (we already have that). Use this concept as a main mechanic like "If this unit has this ability, hit rolls made by Unleash hell targeting this unit only succeed on a Critical Hit".
  • Attach Character (new rule) : Same as Warhammer 40k. Remove all bubbles, abilities that target units wholly within or within 3" and all this stuff. Only Avatar units can have bubbles, auras or wholly within abilities(read below)

 

• Core Keywords: We have Hero, Wizard, Priest, Totem, Monster and Warmachine. Some of them have inner abilities/tables (Wizard, Priest, Hero, etc...), and some of them have some interactions with other mechanics (Totem, Warmachine, etc...). What about other keywords?
  • Mounted Hero: Can only be attached to "Cavalry" units (no need to arbitrary say that models with X wounds or less).
  • Horde: Add 1 to bravery for every Y models that this unit have
  • Monster X+: Can only be wounded on a roll of X+. Remove Monstruous Rampage and writte some of this rampages to their warscrolls (if needed).
  • War Machine: Ignore Monster X+ when targeting a Monster.
  • Transport X: Friendly Faction X Units can Embark and Disembark
  • Cavalry: Can run + Charge/shoot
  • Chariot: Mw at the end of charge phase
  • Infantry: No bonus.
  • Hero: Add that can be attached to Infantry units.
  • Avatar: Can't be killed with abilities that "slain a model", can issue a comands like a Hero/Mounted Hero, and have their own "Monster X" (pseudo-Primarchs for AoS, write this in any God-like or Gotrek-like warscroll).

 

• Add another role: Fast Attack 0-3 (1000p games) and 0-6 roles (2000p games).
  • Chariots and Cavalry are going here. Some Heroes or flying units too if needed.

 

• Command Abilities:
  • Rally: Can only target Horde units.
  • All-out Defense: Can only target units with [SHIELDS] (see below).
  • Challenge: Only Heroes/Avatar/Mounted Heroes. In the combat phase, you can pick 1 enemy Hero/Avatar/Mounted Hero within 6" of this HERO. Until the end of the turn, ignore the melee range characteristic for both HEROES, but each HEROE must target the other one when they are selected in the fight phase. Wounds allocated as part of this Command Ability must be completely allocated to the models in the same Challenge, even if they have a retinue for being Attach Characters. All wounds that are not allocated to the enemy Hero are discarded.

 

• Rewritte all warscrolls abilities. Add or combine abilities to make all of them follow the same structure, but that doesn't mean that one Hero or one special unit could still have their own weird ability. All this abilities are still Warscroll Abilities (exactly as we already have), not USR persé or Keywords. But having a [LABEL] attached to an ability make the whole process of playing the game a lot easier for players and designers. Issues like RAW vs RAI will be easier to fix with just a FAQ:
  • Rewritte all abilities that have mortal wounds made on hit and wound rolls: [TOXIN X]: On a unmodified wound rolls of X, that attack (profile) causes a number of mortal wounds to the target equal to the weapon’s Damage characteristic and the attack sequence ends.
  • All breath attacks, gas attacks, etc: [BREATH] Each time an attack is made with this weapon, that attack automatically hits the target.
  • All units with shields: [SHIELD] Add 1 to Save characteristic (and can interact with All-Out Defense, see above).
  • All deploys, movement shenanigans, setup shenanigans:
    • [AMBUSH]: During deployment, if every model in a unit has this ability, instead of setting up this unit on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and say that it is set up in ambush as a reserve unit. At the end of your first movement phases, you can set up any friendly reserve units that are in ambush on the battlefield, wholly within 9" of the battlefield edge and more than 9" from all enemy units
    • [SCOUT X"]: At the start of the first battleround, after chosing the first player, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can make a X” move with this unit.
    • [INFILTRATE]: During deployment, if every model in a unit has this ability, then when you set it up, it can be set up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" horizontally away from the enemy deployment zone and all enemy models.
  • Add any ability that can interact with what we already have:
    • [BEASTHUNTER] Ignore Montser X.
    • [MARKSMAN] Can target Attached Characters with ranged attacks.
    • [PARRY X] Can't be hit with better rolls of X+ to hit.
    • [BULKY X] Count as X for Transport keyword.
    • [PIKE FORMATION] Only units with Pikes/Spears: Enemy units that charge a unit with this ability can't use any Charge Bonus.
    • [SHIELD WALL] Only units with [SHIELDS]: Enemy units that charge a unit with this ability can't use any Charge Bonus.
    • [CHARGE] Lance Profiles: Add 1 to rend and damage characteristic when the unit charge.

My whole vision is to polish the game, make core mechanics, keywords and warscrolls abilities part of the same layer of rules. There are more things that I would like to see changed or tweaked (buy artifacts with points,more customizations options, ranged profiles that can't target engaged enemy units, rules for terrain, etc..) but my main issue at the moment is that the game doesn't feel finished and it seems that there are a lot of layers of rules that don't need to be separated from the main game.

 

Edit: I edited a bit my brainstorming of possible abilities that I would like to see in the future. There are 2 rerolls (rerolls 1 to hit for ranged and for melee attacks), but I think it's enough to make some units truly "Elite":
  Brainstorming_WarscrollAbilities.pdf 1.53 MB · 1 download

Remove seperate Player Turns and introduce I Go You Go within individual phases and this comprehensive keyword system is a big part of how, and why, MESBG works so well at heart. It means despite there being dozens of different armies which play asymmetrically it's pretty easy to parse how each one plays if you know how the keywords work. All Army lists are contained within a few books solely dedicated to that purpose, while the Rulebook establishes these keyword mechanics. Rules are just rules and lists are just lists.

Unfortunately the evidence of Tenth 40k suggests that they will persist with introducing complex information and new systems within new faction releases and Handbooks rather than creating a navigable and comprehensible core system that army lists then riff off of.

What fundamentally pushed away from gaming AOS was the knowledge that even if I learn the clunky and contradictory nature of the basic rules of the game and my army, there is the chance that every subsequent release will alter that and the guarantee that within a three year cycle I'll need to start over.

That and the complete passivity of having to wait for a player to take an entire turn, sometimes two, before I get mine. Every other skirmish or wargame level game I play allows me to do stuff in at most 15-20 minute intervals, usually much less. All the other games I play are essentially collaborative, they establish a dialogue and flow in their mechanics between players. 

AOS and 40k played at anything besides a top level creates a passive or antagonistic experience in which one player does everything and the other little besides move a bucketful of their troops from the table. If you get double turned its not at all unusual that you do nothing for 40+ minutes besides the gaming equivalent of being repeatedly punched in the face. 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2023 by Nos

[Gailon]

The more I play the more I appreciate the ‘double turn.’ Although most of the time in my games now it isn’t a double turn because we give the turn away. This is because we have learned to play with the priority roll in mind and don’t just push everything forward like we did when first learning. 
 

the mechanic has added enormous depth to learning the game. But I definitely agree that it adds variance. I think that’s a feature, not a bug. 
 

i don’t like chess *because* it’s balanced and stressful. Each position has a ‘right’ answer. I would lose 100/100 games against an IM. 
 

The priority adds a high point of variance in the games. There is a lot to do to play around it and play into it, but it is also front and center reminder that this is a dice game for fun. A lot of people who say that it keeps them from playing seem to think that without it they would win more. If wanting to win all your games because you are the best tactician keeps you playing 40k instead of AoS then I think that’s a good thing. AoS definitely had a better reputation for its culture. Some of that is fending off the try hards. 
 

as for the waiting through two turns. I guess I’m always consumed by the game that it never really bothers me. What my opponent is doing and why is interesting to me. Planning my potential actions on my turn takes plenty of thought for me. 
 

but i am in a streak of super fun games recently. Seems like every game I’m playing is down to the wire and interesting. I do credit a local meta with minimum shooting and mortal wound spam. 

[Beliman]

1 hour ago, Gailon said:

I do credit a local meta with minimum shooting and mortal wound spam

That's a good point to take in mind when designing new AOS armies.

Btw, I get that a double-turn is an AoS feature, but I'm the only one that is surprised that there isn't any army that has a double-turn battle trait?
I'm not saying a warscroll bonus or generic "1 extra command". I'm talking about abilities that trigger if you go first or second, something that improve your units if you are double-turne'd, unique "reactions", etc... this kind of stuff.

[Debello90]

3 hours ago, Beliman said:

Questo è un buon punto da tenere a mente quando si progettano nuovi eserciti AOS.

A proposito, capisco che il doppio turno è una funzionalità AoS, ma sono l'unico a essere sorpreso dal fatto che non esista un esercito che abbia una caratteristica di battaglia del doppio turno?
Non sto dicendo un bonus delle warscroll o un generico "1 comando extra". Sto parlando di abilità che si innescano se vai per primo o per secondo, qualcosa che migliora le tue unità se sei a doppio turno, "reazioni" uniche, ecc... questo genere di cose.

Tzaangor on dish of Tzeench are a bonus of you take the second turn in the round.

[Beliman]

37 minutes ago, Debello90 said:

Tzaangor on dish of Tzeench are a bonus of you take the second turn in the round.

That's why I said:

4 hours ago, Beliman said:

I'm not saying a warscroll bonus or generic "1 extra command".

There are a few abilities that have some interactions, but that's not what I was talking about. If you look at other games, they usually have armies that are based on some of their unique features:

Conquest has a deck for activation: each player shuffle their own Warscrolls in to a Warscroll deck, and each time it's your turn to activate one of your units, you flip one of your warscrolls. There is a faction (City States) that has a full Battle Trait mechanic build around playing with that feature. Btw, all armies have a few units or abilitites that can interact with that Warscroll deck, but that's just a "bonus", not a main feature for an army.

There are a lot more examples, but you get the point.

[Luperci]

Just found out this thread existed, I've been writing down ideas I'd like to see implemented in 4th so I'll chuck them in here.

Overall changes which probably won't happen

-Alternating unit activations

-Incorporating larger dice sizes(I believe GW have stated they don't want to do this for accesibility reasons, you could easily persuade them by telling them they'd sell more dice though)

-Introduce an idea of negative rerolls, basically disadvantage from D&D 5e

Changes to Warscrolls

-Introduce a toughness stat, this won't operate like it does in 40k I'll talk about it more later

-Introduce an intelligence type stat that's used for spellcasting, basically non wizards will use it to resist spells and maybe certain commands/battle tactics

-Change bravery to a faith stat that's also used for priests

-This one I'm not so sure about but maybe a speed stat that would basically replace the fights first rule and determine combat order?

-Weapon stats overall remain the same with the to wound characteristic being replaced by strength and the addition of a damage keyword tag, this would affect a new USR along the lines of Resistant X: Reduce the damage of any attack of X damage type received by this unit by 1 . The main recipients of this rule would be nighthaunt getting resistance to physical weapons. Also no rend on the weapon profile

-There would be a combination of unique abilities and a lot more USRs(which can just be refererred to as abilities), if something is repeated at all it should get a universal ability keyword which unique abilities won't get. At the same time I would want to keep down bloat and not add loads of unnecessary mechanics so some abstraction will be necessary.

Changes to morale

-When failing bravery checks, instead of just losing models, units become routed.

-While routed, you'll have to make a check when taking actions while activating units. For example, if you want to make a move action with a routed unit, you'll have to make a dice roll with a base 50% success rate to see if the unit "listens" to your command.

Changes to turn order

-Instead of having separate turn phases to go through, these are now represented by unit actions and reactions.

-When you activate a unit, you get to make a move action(charge, run or normal move etc.) and then your main action.

-Main actions: fight, fire missile weapons, Cast spell, Seek blessing, monstrous rampages and heroic actions could be rewritten for this too maybe

-I'm not sure if it'd be better to have a set amount of army wide reactions, or for each unit to be able to use reactions if they haven't been activated yet and when they are activated have the choice to hold a reaction.

-Main reactions would be dispell and unleash hell

Universal Abilities

-Shield: This unit may reroll armour save (shields no longer grant +1 to save)

-Regiment/Battalion: While within 3" of another unit with Regiment/Battalion, get +1 to hit rolls

-Brave: Reroll morale checks

-Flying

-Ward X+

-Resistant X (see above)

-Poison: When resolving damage, if successful put a poison counter on enemy unit (this can be represented by a dice of any kind). A unit with a poison counter takes X* damage for each poison counter on it at the end of each battle round, before resolving morale. *not sure exactly how this should be balanced, I figured it'd be most simple just to have one unit able to output one poison counter per turn at base level, maybe d6 damage?

-Immune: This unit cannot be applied with poison counters (This is just for war machines or anything where poison would not make sense, very sparingly used)

-Cruel: Double this units damage against routed units (this might be too much but I wanted failing morale to be REALLY BAD against certain armies, which it seems they tried to do in 40k 10th but failing morale still does not really matter at all)

-Terrifying: Enemy units within melee range of this unit must roll an extra die and ignore the highest when rolling for morale.

-Prowess: You may ignore modifiers to hit rolls

-Shrouded: Enemy units must roll an extra die and ignore the highest when making missile attack hit rolls against this unit

-Area effect/impact: When resolving damage, add 0.5 damage for each model in target enemy unit, rounding down.

-Flurry X: On a critical hit, make X additional attacks. (These can trigger additional hits because it'd be funny)

-Rend X

Changes to combat

-As mentioned before I'd like to increase the dice sizes used, this is where that comes in, ideally both hit and wound rolls would go up to a d12(an actual d12, not 2d6), or maybe a d20?

-Hit rolls are the same apart from that aside from an unmodified max hit roll(6 for d6, 12 for d12 etc.) is a critical hit which automatically succeeds wound rolls and and ignores normal saves (it does NOT ignore ward saves)

-The base wound roll check is a 50/50, for the sake of this example I'll use a d12. The base check is a 6+, you then add your weapon strength and subtract target's toughness.

-The critical hit mechanic and new wound roll mechanics don't really work as well on lower numbered dice, the critical hit becomes really too strong and there isn't enough granularity for the wounding mechanic to work as I'd intend

-In melee combat, both players roll all hit rolls at the same time, and then take turns applying them(defending player still allocates damage). The unit with higher speed stat goes first, but maybe the activating player can get a temporary speed bonus and also charging units can get a temporary speed bonus.

Prayers and spells

-I haven't put too much thought into this but I'd really like these mechanics to feel special and unique

-Spells can be resisted to some extent even by non wizards with their magic/intelligence stat(some units maybe will be able to do so with other stats due to special abilities), but only other wizards can dispell

-I had an idea of units comprised of spellcasters and multiple heroes together being able to cast rituals. With units of casters they would basically lose potency and models are killed, taking penalties from the casting roll and maybe the effects too? As a reaction hero wizards can join a ritual with another hero casting a spell during their activation which powers up the casting roll and effects of the spell itself.

-Prayers cannot be interacted with in this way, the units are functionally seeking blessings from their God using their bravery/faith stat

-Perhaps to distinguish them beyond how they are manifested, prayers can be largely focused on buffs and healing, whereas spells can be focused on debuffing, damage and summoning. There'll be some crossover though with Khorne prayer summoning and necromancer spell healing

 

I'm not a games writer so maybe some of this or all of this kinda sucks but thanks for reading it if you did.

 

Edited December 18, 2023 by Luperci

[Gitzdee]

Do you all think it would be possible to go to D10 or D12 dice with the current version of the core rules?  I was wondering if it would be a possibility for 4th.

I think it could be possible with updates warscrolls when 4th releases. Could also possibly replace the 2D6 rolls to a D12. Dont think it is very likely though.

[Baron Klatz]

Very Doubtful. Even Soulbound was made D6 to match-up with AoS’ use of it and Cubicle7 reported that system was a big success and will continue it into the 2nd edition. 

Edited February 7 by Baron Klatz

[Ganigumo]

I don't think we need the extra granularity of a d10/12 system? There's a point where what you get out of it stops being worth the complexity and a d6 is probably fine. I know a die change isn't that big, but how important is it for us to be able to hit on 3.5s or get a +/-0.5 to hit? You could build a system around it and it would be fine, but it seems like a lot of work for not much benefit.

[Flippy]

1 hour ago, Gitzdee said:

Do you all think it would be possible to go to D10 or D12 dice with the current version of the core rules?  I was wondering if it would be a possibility for 4th.

I think it could be possible with updates warscrolls when 4th releases. Could also possibly replace the 2D6 rolls to a D12. Dont think it is very likely though.

No way. Space Marines removed from 40k is more likely than GW abandoning D6.

[Gitzdee]

I just like the idea that a chaos warrior could have 10 armour save. Compared to maybe a 3 armour save for a moonclan stabba grot. I think it could make the stats represent the models better than a D6 could.

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

3 hours ago, Gitzdee said:

I just like the idea that a chaos warrior could have 10 armour save. Compared to maybe a 3 armour save for a moonclan stabba grot. I think it could make the stats represent the models better than a D6 could.

Put like that, I actually quite like the concept. At least it gets things back to being reflected in basic stats rather than a plethora of special rules. 

Don't think it's at all likely to happen, though. 

[Beliman]

10 hours ago, Gitzdee said:

I just like the idea that a chaos warrior could have 10 armour save. Compared to maybe a 3 armour save for a moonclan stabba grot. I think it could make the stats represent the models better than a D6 could.

I get the point, but you can achieve something like that with what we already have. 

• Make Chaos Warriors a bit more resilient:
  • Better save (e.g: 2+)
  • Ward Save
  • Re-roll Saves
  • -X to Hit/Wounds for ranged and melee attacks
  • Can only be Hitted/Wounded on rolls of 4+ (Sekhar new "mechanic").
  • Ethereal
  • Can use Commands (AOD) without spending a Command Point.

That's how AOS works, and even if I like simplicity over layers of rules (that can even be stacked), I think that  it's a good system if the devs are completely in control of this system.

Edited February 8 by Beliman

[Gitzdee]

35 minutes ago, Beliman said:

If get the point, but you can achieve something like that with what we already have. 

• Make Chaos Warriors a bit more resilient:
  • Better save (e.g: 2+)
  • Ward Save
  • Re-roll Saves
  • -X to Hit/Wounds for ranged and melee attacks
  • Can only be Hitted/Wounded on rolls of 4+ (Sekhar new "mechanic").
  • Ethereal
  • Can use Commands (AOD) without spending a Command Point.

That's how AOS works, and even if I like simplicity over layers of rules (that can even be stacked), I think that  it's a good system if the devs are completely in control of this system.

That is kinda the point i am trying to make. It is complicated layers of rules for no real reason most of the time. But i guess it adds some flavour besides just having a single statline.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

33 minutes ago, Beliman said:

If get the point, but you can achieve something like that with what we already have. 

• Make Chaos Warriors a bit more resilient:
  • Better save (e.g: 2+)
  • Ward Save
  • Re-roll Saves
  • -X to Hit/Wounds for ranged and melee attacks
  • Can only be Hitted/Wounded on rolls of 4+ (Sekhar new "mechanic").
  • Ethereal
  • Can use Commands (AOD) without spending a Command Point.

That's how AOS works, and even if I like simplicity over layers of rules (that can even be stacked), I think that  it's a good system if the devs are completely in control of this system.

I agree with this. It's not like AoS actually struggles modeling the difference in toughness between a Chaos Warrior and Grot. If there is an actual problem here that would justify moving to d10s or whatever, it must be something else. Maybe something about how easy/difficult it is to tell at a glance and get an intuitive understanding of how defensive a Chaos Warrior actually is.

The "best" argument for moving to d10s or d12s is probably that it would allow us to get rid of the wound roll. But that would probably necessitate redesigning everything about the game, so the juice is not really worth the squeeze here.

[Chikout]

I understand that this is a wishlisting thread but GW is never going to use anything but a d6 for their core games. There was an interview with an ex gw guy on the painting phase podcast who explained that GW always chooses the mass market option. 

My current desires are as follows:

Dump battletactics. Have a selection of secondaries for each battle plan. 

Introduce spearhead as a format. 

Change up enhancements. 

Every general gets a command trait. Every character who isn't special gets an artefact.

Every wizard gets as many spells as they can cast. 

Every applicable mount gets a mount trait. 

Make more of all of these and introduce a free tier, a 20 point tier and a 50 point tier. 

Dump battalions completely 

Roll off for turn one. 

Models can fight in two ranks in close combat 

Moving is alternating activations but if you moved in the opponents turn you can't move in yours - so all models can move in either turn but only once per battle round. 

Across the entire game rebalance things to have fewer attacks than do more damage. On the other hand have fewer mortal wounds and fewer ward saves. 

Never let rally be better than 6+  

[Gaz Taylor]

12 hours ago, Gitzdee said:

Do you all think it would be possible to go to D10 or D12 dice with the current version of the core rules?  I was wondering if it would be a possibility for 4th.

I don't think GW will ever do that (yes I know about Inquisitor!) as keeping the rules using D6 makes it more accessible to the general public as that's what dice are  

Also I don't know if it's easier/cheaper to produce D6 vs D10/20 on mass or if the mark up is better when you sell your own branded versions.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

13 minutes ago, Chikout said:

Introduce spearhead as a format. 

And then also support the format by actually writing battle plans that work at 1000 Points.

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

20 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

And then also support the format by actually writing battle plans that work at 1000 Points.

Yes!! I'd play a lot more games if 1000 points was more viable. 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

24 minutes ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:

Yes!! I'd play a lot more games if 1000 points was more viable. 

The game experience is never going to be 100% perfect at 1000 points, but it becomes a lot more playable when you are not expected to contest up to 6 objectives with half an army.

Edited February 8 by Neil Arthur Hotep

[Koala]

1 hour ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I don't think GW will ever do that (yes I know about Inquisitor!) as keeping the rules using D6 makes it more accessible to the general public as that's what dice are  

Also I don't know if it's easier/cheaper to produce D6 vs D10/20 on mass or if the mark up is better when you sell your own branded versions.

Fun fact: GW tried D12 in its dead on arrival 8th "Apocalypse" system. 

It also had alternating activations.

 

Turns out there practical reasons against bigger number dice:

It is hillarious how problematic rolling several D12 at once can be. Throwing them on uneven terrain/close to models - as one does in Casual Games - is useless: half of them will not show a clear number (uneven, "burning", how do you call it?). Even in a dice tray they will regularly block each other. 

I say in smaller settings (RPGs, skirmishers like Warcry) different Dice can be great. After all there you rarely throw more than a couple of them. On the scale of GW mainline games (AoS, 40k, 30k, ToW) its d6 only.

[Gaz Taylor]

1 minute ago, Koala said:

Fun fact: GW tried D12 in its dead on arrival 8th "Apocalypse" system. 

It also had alternating activations.

I didn't know that!

Also your other points make sense and I didn't think of those

[Gitzdee]

Haha i just like rolling different types of dice i guess. Its a small thing that just more fun. Just like scatter dice or any other weird type of D6.

[Greyshadow]

I am a painter first and foremost if I am honest but when I do play - I freaking love the priority roll. I just find it super funned that is why I want it to stay.