Editorial: Time to Kill the Scatter Die

Dice-Roll

Is the Scatter Dice really that useful? One gamer doesn’t think so!

A Guest Editorial by HeavyPlate

1-300x225

Hey everyone, HeavyPlate here with an editorial about our old friend, the Scatter Die!

Recently, Games Workshop released their newest dice cube, and curiously, there wasn’t a scatter die inside of it. This struck me as odd but I kind of just brushed it aside as “Just another weird thing GW does.”

But to my surprise, my local community started spouting relief, as if they felt it was a sign that eventually, maybe sooner rather than later, Games Workshop would do away with the signature six sided cube.

Now, spoiler alert, GW shortly after just released a giant tub of scatter dice to be sold however in stores, usually for less then a $1 a piece. But that could just be a band-aid fix for forgetting to include the scatter in the dice cube, or a sign of trying to dump their inventory for longer term plans to do away with it entirely.

Frankly, this was something that hadn’t even entered my brain. The scatter die has been such a staple for so long that I just accept it as part of the game. It was so old hat that I didn’t even see why they’d WANT to get rid of it at first. So I asked around and took a survey on everyone’s opinion on it. This is what came up the most.

2
  • It’s the most common argument in 40k

This has happened to everyone. The scatter is rolled and the 2d6 determined, the player busts out the tape measure and points it in the wrong direction. You tell him to move it because it is wrong. Most are cool with this, but not all can deal with being told they are wrong.

Now, 99% of the time, this is just a problem of a point of view. That the person with the tape just has a bad angle of the arrow. This is why the most effective way is when both players are resolving the scatter together.

  • It’s time consuming

This one everyone can agree on. Even if you have mastered how to resolve a scatter quickly, it regularly eats up more time than other shooting attacks. Even just not being able to find the scatter die for a bit slows things down, then if you have misplaced or even forgotten your template(s), hunting for the best location, scattering, moving, and finally counting how many are actually hit. It’s fairly tedious, especially with things that fire multiple templates. Some don’t like it so much they build lists to exclude a scattering weapon, just so they don’t have to do deal with it.

  • It’s an imperfect system

Because of all the steps involved, and the nature of the game and the scatter, it’s very difficult to resolve their attacks perfectly. As hard as you try, you’ll never truly achieve the perfect line from the arrow and get the correct distance from the center and THEN also get the right count of what is under a blast in a horde of models. There are too many variables. Most of the time players just try to work out what makes the most sense and just roll with that instead.

A feeling I also got from members of my community was that they wanted to do away with templates in general. They feel they contribute to the problem of complexity to 40k. A group even tried to experiment with a system to replace them. An example of their system was to propose that if the weapon fired a small blast, it just did D3 hits, instead of scattering and using the template.

While I can appreciate the attempt to make a thunderfire cannon quicker to play with, this system felt very wrong to me. The idea of a weapon that basically auto hits and could potentially be out of line of site just seems wrong. But what would be a better alternative? What would a gaming world looking like without this unique D6 we all must carry around?

After giving a lot of thought on how the scatter system works, I’ve come up with a proposed alternate to blast weapons. Now, please: I know this isn’t perfect and there are plenty of holes in it, I’m just trying to keep the flavor of the original idea while trying to streamline it somewhat.

3

So, if a weapon has the “Blast” profile, place the small blast on an enemy target within the weapons range.

Roll a D6, on the result of a 5+, the weapon “Hits” and every model under the blast is hit. (Just like before)

On a results of a 3 or 4, take a number of dice equal to the firing models Ballistic Skill(Example: BS 4 would get 4 dice, BS 3 would get 3) and roll them. Each results of a 4+ equals a hit on the enemy unit.

On the results of a 1 or 2, the weapon misses completely and no hits are achieved.

This is the basic concept I’ve come up with. I’m trying to keep the flavor that model positioning matters, while not having to place a template multiple times. It also means that you should statistically get the same number of “Hit” results as before. Finally, it also rewards armies that have a higher ballistic skill firing “scatter” weapons and had a reduced scatter, sometimes getting a direct hit despite the arrow, while still crippling the armies that have a lower BS. Those armies are usually only hoping for a “Hit” result anyway. From here you can give some weapons special rules, like maybe getting a “Hit” on a 4+ instead of being Twin-linked or on a 3,4 result hits can be achieved on a 3+ instead as an example.

With a Large blast, and a 3-4 result is rolled, you would just use the user’s BS times two. (For example a BS 4 would get 8 dice) This does mean that there would be instances that you could potentially do more damage with a 3-4 results, but it is rare and random, just like a scattering arrow. If the template is covering one large model, such as a vehicle or monstrous creature and a 3-4 is rolled, just use 1d6 following the same rules as before (a 4+ achieves a hit) from there. This is so you don’t have a scenario where you could get a large number of hits that wouldn’t of happened normally.

I was happy with this as a replacement for scattering weapons, when it hit me hard that’s not the only use for that silly dice.

Deep Strike

4

This one floored me for a while. I thought it over for a long time, and frankly, for Deep Strike, using a scatter dice is kind of elegant. It’s probably the simplest way to resolve a powerful unit screaming from orbit or appearing from the warp etc. But this is a world that doesn’t have the luxury of a scattering D6, so how would you resolve this fairly without one?

If a unit has the deep strike special rule, place the first model as you would before.

Roll a D6, on a result of a 5+, the unit “Hits” and doesn’t move, continue with the deep-strike as previously done.

On a 3,4 results, roll 2d6 and the controlling player MUST place the starting model the combined result away from the original point, but the controlling player chooses the direction.

On result of a 2, roll 2d6 and the enemy player gets to choose the direction the unit must move.

On a 1, the unit suffers a mishap.

Example. A player is deep striking a 5 man unit of assault marines.

A 3 is rolled, the player deep striking must move that unit 2d6 from the initial position, he uses his tape measure and makes a circle equaling the size of the rolled result of the 2d6. He may place the first marine anywhere on the rim of that circle, but it must be on it. He then continues to place the unit as the rules normally state.

If a 2 is rolled, this process is instead done but the opposing player. This means they could potentially put that model where it would mishap or not be able to make a concentric circle.

In my mind, whenever a player is deep striking a unit, one side is hoping for good, the other not so much. I limit the options for the enemy player by only allowing a 2 result to take power into his hands because they will try to mishap the unit, and if they can not, then they’d at least get to put that unit farther from their own models. The enemy is rooting for a mishap anyway so it can only happen on a 1. Personally i like this more than just allowing units to appear on the board however they want with almost to no consequence.

So there you have it, an in depth look at what a world without the scatter die could look like. Tell me what you think of it. Do you think we still need a scatter die in 40k? What would you do differently? Or would you keep it how it is? Post your thoughts below.

And as always, Frontline Gaming sells Games Workshop product at up to 25% off of retail, every day!

You can also pick up some cheap models in our Second Hand Shop. Some of these gems are quite rare, sometimes they’re fully painted!

secondhandstore
  • Old zogwort

    Booo they are fun.

    • Zingbaby

      Agreed.

  • Boondox

    We started using a clock face template and a D12 for this a long time ago after too many complaints about the scatter dice…

    • Djbz

      How do you do a “hit” roll then?

      • Pedwidge

        Roll a 1. Normally it’s 2d6 so the range is 2-12.

        • Kyle Goguen

          the d12 is for determing direction, not distance

  • Horus84cmd

    Personally, I would neither miss the scatter dice nor would I be bothered if it stays.

    Generally, I reckon we will see it getting dropped. As a dice tool it is not imperative to the game; rules can be written that represent a scattering effect. Also, even through it a small item, it will probably save a nice chunk of money over an extended length time for GW.

  • Chaosrex

    Give each side and each corner of the table a number.

    #1 is the side that’s directly opposite to the active player, then goes clockwise.

    Throw a D8, the result is the direction in wich the template scatter.

    Simple and fast.

    • Heinz Fiction

      …But only 8 directions. Thats like playing 40k on a grid actually…

      • zeno666

        You might as well with those bulky rules…
        Where is that wall btw that doesn’t allow you to get closer than 1″ to the enemy models?

        • georgelabour

          Possibly in the same place where the Spartans kept their borders.

    • No-one Special

      So remove one dice and replace it with another, while making which direction the template moves in even more ambiguous as aiming at an entire board section instead of a specific direction. This is not a solution at all, it makes things much much worse.

  • Nik Dixon

    How about a pen laser on a small stand (so it bridges small models) that spins like a twister spinner!

  • Talos2

    No

  • Heinz Fiction

    If you want to have scatter in the game, I think the scatter die is the most elegant solution. Other games came up with different solutions but they all felt like someone reinvented the wheel and made it rectangular.

  • Admiral Raptor

    Get rid of it. Most war games get a long just fine without needing a random directional dice. All it does is slow down game play, and add another layer of randomness to the game.

    This is another situation where the AoS rules are simpler, faster and better than 40k.

  • Spacefrisian

    I bet some already know this, but Warmahordes kind of fixed this certain issue, and its not hard to figure out when you see there blast template. That one even combines 3 blast radiuses in 1 single blast.

  • Nathaniel Wright

    Or maybe just learn to communicate with the person you’re playing with.

    I dunno, seems easier than finding a new way to give orks the shaft.

    • grim_dork

      Hear hear!

  • nurglitch

    Get a T-square if you want to avoid the parallax problem. Otherwise the scatter die is handy.

  • jasonsation

    Bolt action players are a bit upset that the new rules have templates, they liked the lack of templates. I kind of like the lack of them too. Speeds things up. Wonder how it would go over to get rid of them in 40k?

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      The new BA rule is you just place the template, no scatter, and roll to wound whoever is under it.

      I think this BA idea could work for 40k with a tweak:

      Place template.
      Count models under it.
      Roll to hit them all with normal BS.

      If out of LOS, roll to hit, if a hit you can place the template as above. If a miss, template is lost. Multiple barrages just do this for each blast.

      • Rudboy TheRed

        Brilliant idea 😀

        • Azrell

          It is. but you can be sure if GW took an idea like that and ran with it by the time it was in a rule book it would be a table with 256 different outcomes and take 15 min of dice rolling to complete.

      • Shawn

        I like this.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          good questions, I guess we could have the 2xInitiative max out at 10 so there is always some chance of scattering. Majority Initiative would be worked out the same way majority Toughness is now, ie the commonest Initiative value in the unit.

          • Shawn

            That might work. If you don’t mind. I’ll copy the post and see how it plays out in a few games. Of course, I’ll give you credit for the idea 😉

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            feel free!

  • shiwan

    OR translate the blast template to xd6 hits and otherwise follow the regular rules for LoS and such. D6 for small and +d6 per size after that. This way templates are actually useful. Vindicators would actually do something! OMG!

  • WaarrggBobo

    Infinity got rid of scattering templates, and i gotta say it hurt gameplay and immersion. Yeah, the game is more tactically predictive, faster, and has less arguments– but it feels more emotionally hollow and less fun.

    • zeno666

      Indeed! It really feels weird to throw a smoke bomb around the corner and nothing happens (if you miss, no scatter, nothing happens).

      • Azrell

        i could be a dud, it could bounced and landed face down, or rolled into a sewer grate… immersion is about your imagination not reading having to read a paragraph about what happened every time you roll a dice.

        the rule should flow smoothly and those with imagination will see that story.

  • SilentPony

    So…more rules is the answer? Get rid of the simple die with arrows, and instead add charts and reference tables for each number of a die role for each individual scenario where a simple scatter die would have solved it?

    Oh yeah. Great idea!

  • Davor Mackovic

    Every excuse used not to have the scatter dice is just pathetic. Time consuming? There are more things time consuming. People told they are wrong? If you don’t get told you are wrong or how a rule works, then something is wrong in 40K lol. Again more time consuming there. Measured wrong? Can’t get it perfect? Jus like when moving 6″?

    Come on make some actual good excuses. These issues never come up that I know of, and never read it once on the internet someone complaining. Hey I get it. This is the person who is doing the GW FAQs where they answer questions than nobody ever asked. 😛 Kidding there.

  • AnomanderRake

    Scatter dice may be an imperfect system, but I suspect there’s something of the violence inherent in the system about it.

    Alternate methods of blast resolution have their own weaknesses. Pulling out the Infinity/Warmachine scatter solution makes the final position of the template more predictable and doesn’t actually make the arguments over direction any less common, getting rid of templates entirely a la Bolt Action makes blasts deal a constant number of hits regardless of the target unit’s size (which doesn’t matter a lot in Bolt Action given consistent unit sizes, but in 40k where a squad might be three Bikes or fifty Conscripts giving all blasts a consistent damage output is pretty counterintuitive), and your proposed method of resolution doesn’t really reduce complexity much (while giving us a similar counterintuitive result of getting more hits on single models by rolling a 3-4 than rolling a 5+)

    As for scattering Deep Strikers your proposed method of resolution takes away from player control; as is I can plant a unit somewhere I can be certain it isn’t going to mishap, your system gives me a 1/6 chance of a mishap any time I Deep Strike. That’s an unacceptable level of risk when I might be dropping a 300pt GK Terminator unit, at least to me.

    At the end of the day there’s a lot of ‘close enough’, ‘do you agree…’, and approximations/guesswork/splitting the difference that has to go into any template-based method of resolution. The advantage of the scatter dice is that it’s fewer mental steps (scatter-count hits) than rolling on a table would be, and it produces a more intuitive damage model (where large units are easier to hit and take more hits) without resorting to flowcharts and tables. I agree that there’s subjectivity involved, but I think sportsmanship/tighter guidelines for use are a better fix than dumping the scatter die.

    On the subject of Deep Strike I’d honestly prefer to make teleport homers more accessible and then just ban Deep Striking outside of teleport homer coverage. It makes it interact with the ground game more, produces dramatic scenes of trying to get a teleport homer to a target point in time, and takes away from heavily random tools you can’t really defend against popping up out of nowhere and blowing things twice their points into a cloud of dust and smoke.

    • Patriarch

      “…but I suspect there’s something of the violence inherent in the system about it.”

      “Help! Help! I’m being re-rolled!”

      • Dennis J. Pechavar

        Bloody gamer!

  • Arthfael

    I love it … even though I do agree that my usual opponent is very bad at determining which way it points ^^

  • Matt Mo

    Really the scatter dice is not that hard to use or unwieldy or even time consuming. I get that sometimes people can’t agree but I usually let my opponent tell me where the first deep striking model lands and then see if I concur with his placement. Simple. And not very time consuming (maybe ~20 seconds).

    Imo the scatter dice is A) a part of 40k as much as boltguns and power armor and B) a way to add a bit of depth and dynamics when shooting a weapon that has a huge footprint. It would be lame to just roll a dice and on a 1 or 2 have it miss. Seems like someone else said: “hollow” and would suck the flavor out of firing big weapons like that. Again, if it’s so complicated and time consuming, having another set of rules with charts and d6 rolls doesn’t seem like the most logical solution.

    The biggest issue that I can see arising with scatter dice is the direction the dice faces. If the two people playing the game are mature enough to agree which way the dice is facing in a game of plastic dolls I think everyone will be OK, and the scatter dice is fine just like it is!

    • Horus84cmd

      Scatter dice being “hard”to use is such a non-issue, if players are just adults about using them.

      • Azrell

        but what about the children.

  • rtheom

    I’d rather see the templates disappear before the scatter die, although they are very heavily linked, so it would be kind of silly to see just the templates go.

    My problem with the templates is that they are often a pain in the butt to place over models, difficult to see who exactly is beneath them, and you usually end up hitting about the same number of models with them anyway, barring a huge scatter, which is usually negated by high BS values. You could easily just change Small Scatter and Flamer to D3 hits and Large to D6 and get relatively the same results as what the templates typically get.

    • Ben_S

      “you usually end up hitting about the same number of models with them anyway”

      Surely how many you hit depends on how the enemy are positioned? Changing to d3 would mean it makes no difference whether or not the enemy is bunched up or not.

      • rtheom

        Yes, this is true, but given the typical way people position their models and minimum spacing requirements for a unit and the fact that the firer gets to choose where in the unit the template is going to land, you rarely get more than 3 with small and 6-7 with large. Sure, there are fringe cases, but 90% of the time, there is no real difference and time is just wasted/models knocked over trying to lean over the table. The flamer template is slightly more situational, but there also tend to be more time spent trying to find the maximum number that can be hit by the tail, which, likewise, only slows down the game a lot for relatively little gain.

        • Ben_S

          Exactly – people do space their armies out in response to the threat of templates, which shows that they do make a difference to positioning. That’s why you rarely see much difference in the number of models under the template; because people generally position their models accordingly.

          If there were no templates, then people would be free to bunch models up a lot more. You might even find hordes of Orks in base to base contact on movement trays. Granted this would speed the game up, but also affect it in other ways.

          • rtheom

            So yes, you have seen exactly what I have seen then.

            I’m failing to see the problem with model bunching otherwise though… maybe in really huge blobs you’d get models making their pile in a little bit faster? It’s typically gotta be 20+ models on 25-32 mm bases to really make much of a difference there though, in my experience. And even then, the added couple of attacks those extra models make don’t typically swing Close Combats extremely since blobs of that size usually consist of pretty weak models to begin with.

            I guess you could get a few more guys being able to see through janky terrain for line of sight? It makes piling out of a vehicle marginally less dangerous?

            Although at the same time, tightly bunched models in smaller numbers makes it more likely that if a template scatters, it misses the group or hits less. So there’s a definite trade off of effect that in the course of a game is very likely to be equalized.

  • Aezeal

    Getting rid of it is a good idea. Never thought about it but the article is right. It caused a lot of discussion in my WFB games.

    • Inian

      Not sure I agree with the proposed system in this article though, but getting rid of special dice is always a plus in my book.

  • Frank O’Donnell

    I’m sure the same people who want it gone will be the first to want it back when they see the amount of damage the like’s of 4 quad launchers put on them every turn as no longer will the first one scatter so far away as to have none of them hit.

  • Majere613

    The suggested ‘fixes’ totally miss the point of Blast weapons- they’re weapons which, when used recklessly, present a very real risk of friendly fire. I often use Demolishers with my Renegades at BS2, and if I fire at something too close to my own side, I have to consider the very real risk of shooting my own troops. Hell, I have to consider the risk of hitting the firing tank! It’s a very important thing to have for any system with large ordnance, especially things like indirect Manticore shots.

    The Warmachine ‘clock face’ system has its own flaws, most notably that for smaller templates, there are spots within scatter range of the target point that are completely safe because they fall between points of the clock.

    AoS uses a system that’s even worse, with some blast type weapons just hitting or missing on a flat 4+ (Soul grinders spring to mind) and others getting an inconsistent +1 to hit for large target units, still with no chance of friendly fire.

    Ultimately, the thing to do is roll the Scatter dice as close to the original target point as possible, and have an independent third party resolve the result if both players can’t agree in a competitive setting.

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      I think its actually pretty dumb that a tank can blow itself up with its own cannon, or that a thrown grenade can scatter further than it can be thrown, end up behind the thrower etc. It would be easy to say that no bast can scatter more than a third of the distance to the target, or half if you think that’s too good.

      • Shawn

        Warmachine has something like this in effect for its game.

      • Majere613

        It’s not at all dumb. Ever use a rocket launcher in any FPS ever and fire it at something too close to you? It’s that.
        It’s important to realise that most tanks that carry Ordnance weapons aren’t likely to kill themselves with it because the shell isn’t designed for that- a Leman Russ isn’t all that likely to pen AV14 with a Battlecannon and can’t one-shot itself even if it does- which is entirely accurate. Most tank crews would be unhappy about firing an HE shell point-blank but since the round isn’t designed to defeat armour with its blast, they could get away with it. Demolishers and Vindicators are firing a weapon specifically designed to annihilate anything in its radius, and if you choose to deploy such a weapon point-blank you’re taking a big risk. That risk is an important part of the tactics of employing them and shouldn’t be reduced or removed. It’s exactly the same principle as fumbling a Frag grenade and hitting your own squad, and if you think that never happens you’d be very wrong, even ignoring the infamous ‘return-to-sender’ which every serviceman seems to have a tall tale about.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          modern rocket and missile launchers have safeguards, basically timers, that mean they can’t go off close to the firer, so they don’t explode hitting branches when fired from cover for instance. It wouldn’t be physically possible for casement mounted weapons to fire at a short enough range to hit themselves due to the minimum elevation of the gun.

  • Bryan Ruhe

    I’m sorry, Petey, but your suggestions are far more complicated than the scatter die. They would require two more tables, and goodness knows there are already enough of those.

  • Will Frank

    The method I would use, if I were doing away with the scatter die is; Place the template. The number of models under the template is the number of rolls to-hit the firing model rolls.

    • TenDM

      It’s not perfect, but unless you want to introduce a bunch of extra rolls and tables I think your solution is about as good as it’s going to get.

  • markdawg

    Time to kill I go you go almost everyone else has! The scatter die must also be destroyed.

  • No-one Special

    This entire article seems very forced and contrived. The problems it cites are all human factors revolving around players either knowingly or accidentally cheating, but this is not a problem exclusive to templates/scatter dice and if removed will just shift to whatever other method is used in its place or migrate to another area of the game. Arguments about line of sight will become more common place, with debates over whether gun barrels and boot heels count as seeing a model. If there’s an advantage to be had, there’s a type of gamer that will try to gain that advantage.

    Scatter dice represent an original method of determining a truly random direction. The article even goes on to admit that they are an elegant solution to determining where a falling object randomly lands (in this instance, a drop pod) but at the same time fails to grasp that this is the primary reason behind having a blast template in the first place – they’re representing large falling objects (in this case shells) that don’t really miss, they just don’t always land exactly where you want them to. So how can it be an elegant solution for one and not the other if they’re essentially the same thing?
    Removing scatter dice from 40k would remove part of its uniqueness. I can understand the need for streamlining 40k, but the scatter dice is not an area we should be looking at. How about the million special rules for starters? Or the outright crazy allies and formations rules that have busted the game as no amount of playing testing is ever going to balance that mountain of possibility.

  • TenDM

    I can agree that the system has several faults, but I can’t think of a solution that doesn’t further complicate the game.
    I mean say you wanted to do a system where you choose the target then roll for a hit based on BS. On a 1 it comes towards you, on all other misses overshoot the target, and a hit lands the template right on top of the target. If it didn’t the template moves either away from the firer* or towards the firer by 2D6-BS inches.
    This would remove the scatter dice and make the system more accurate. If pushed for specifics you can just measure the distance from the firer to the to target model, then add/remove 2D5-BS and remeasure. In terms of narrative it usually makes just as much sense for these devices to over/undershoot rather than scattering.
    However as much as I like that idea it’s complicated and a little more time consuming. It might introduce a new layer of strategy with deep striking units but it’d probably give players enough control that it would break a few things.

    I think the root of the problem is that templates are physically impractical. It’s rarely possible to just put the template down flat and most of the time it’s hard to even agree where the template is because players are on the opposite side of the table. I guess by the same logic all measuring is flawed. I mean how many of us move all our models precisely 6 inches every time? It’s not just being lazy or needing to streamline, it’s actually really hard to get any sort of precise measuring device in there.
    Unless you want to set up a complex overhead camera system these systems are going to remain flawed.

    *The firer could be a table edge or corner, like the opposite of falling
    back. Either determined randomly or based on the owning players
    deployment zone. Without BS 1 and 2 = forward, 3 and 4 = back, 5 and 6 = direct hit.

  • BlasterCA

    People have trouble lining up the tape measure & Scatter Die? We’ve akways easily just put the tape measure *through* the corners of the die, out as far as needed. So if the scatter was 6″ we drew it out 7, maybe 8 inches, lined the 6″edge at the corner of the die & used the extra inch or two to alignef the tape measure through the opposite corner. Pretty simple, if you think about it. I actualy never knew people didn’t do it this easy & intuitive way!

    Blaster was here…

  • BlasterCA

    & now with cheap $2-$3 [including shipping!] laser line levelers, even easier!

    Blaster was here…

  • BlasterCA

    Plus, I liked the old 40k 2e rules of the Scatter Die plus Distance Die. The Distance Die had 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 & basically a Fumble/Explosion/Fail as the 6th face. If you rolled a Hit on the Scatter Die & the Fumble/Fail on the Distance Die, the shooting weapon exploded & not only destroyed the model, but you centered the template on.the shooting model. Therefore potentially taking out friendlies in the process! 😀

    Blaster was here… [& was victim to more than one Hit+Fumble roll!]

  • Thunderchild

    Wondering if a simple solution would be to do away with the template and make a blast hit equal to your ballistic skill. Marine hits up to four enemy, guard three. Large blast is double hits.
    Just a thought for quick play.

    • Pete McGwire

      Then you lose the whole mechanic of blasts becoming less efficient against smaller units or hitting unintended targets. No thanks.

  • Pete McGwire

    A one in six chance of a mishap with a pod would be much worse than the chance of it happening currently unless you are placing right on the board edge.

    • shiwan

      Oh god no! Marines forced to deal with some things most other armies see as normal. We can’t have that!

  • Bolt Action had none (no template, so no scatter) but I think they will be introducing one in the next edition (release september).

    • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

      there were issues with their system, it made small teams, commanders etc extremely vulnerable to HE weapons since those weapons did as many hits to them as they would to a full squad. I think they realised people were just taking minimum HQ requirements partly due to this. There are a few tweaks to make HQs more relevant in the new ruleset apparently.

  • Kostas Pap Gus

    I like scatter dice. It makes the game interesting and I think makes sense powerful weapons that fire from afar to be imprecise. You have 1/3 chances to hit on target and even if it scatters -d6 for the small template and 2d6 for the big one- your shots don’t miss target often.

  • Deacon Ix

    Originally you rolled to hit with a blast just like any other weapon – the scatter only happened if you missed – as BS is 3 is generally considered on the low side of average then you would cut out over half of the scatter rolls, this has always felt like a better system to me.

  • Marek Gackiewicz

    I like the scatter dice, it makes missing in crowded areas so much funnier.

  • Shawn

    I like the idea that you’d consider utilizing house rules for your games. However, I don’t see your system changing much. Instead of rolling a single die to see how many hits you generate, you’re rolling multiple dice. That, I think would consume more time. The idea of a big artillery being inaccurate makes more sense to me as well. Additionally, if you are going to reduce the auto-hit of the template the weapon that would normally utilize the template should have a reduced cost on the battle field.