Sunday, 26 July 2026

Game Design #117: Pre- and post- dice math

Something I've been thinking about lately. I tend to be pretty free with swapping in/out mechanics in my homebrew rules, as long as they achieves the result (probabilities) I desire. 

However, when playing with my kids I've found doing modifiers and math before you roll the dice to be better/clearer. Hmm. That sounded clear as mud. 

Guess I'd better define what I'm trying to articulate:

 --

Pre-Roll Math (Modifying the Target Number)

Any math (adding/subtracting modifiers etc) occurs BEFORE you roll dice.  You already know the results you are looking for. It usually involves modifying the initial stat or target number.

 
Example: A archer is shooting at a target in cover. It is a tricky shot that needs to be penalised.

You need to roll a 4+ on a d6 to hit. (target/stat)

There is a +2 modifier to this 4+ target number, making it 6.  (modifier+math)

You roll, knowing you need 6s and can ignore the rest. (roll) 

There is a single piece of math - modifying the target number. The individual dice can be quickly be counted or discarded. Masses of dice are no problem - you're just looking for 6s - no mental effort required.

 --

Post-Roll Math (Modifying the Dice Roll)

Math (adding/subtracting modifiers etc) occurs AFTER you roll the dice.  You are adding and subtracting numbers individually to the already-rolled dice. It involves modifying the results on the dice.


Example: A archer is shooting at a target in cover. It is a tricky shot that needs to be penalised.

You need to roll a 4+ on a d6 to hit. (target/stat)

There is a -2 to the dice rolls. (modifier)

You then roll your dice (roll)

You then deduct 2 from each dice rolled (math)

You are performing a math operation (albeit as simple as -2) from each and every dice rolled, which is then compared to the 4+ target number.

---- 

Geez - this seems like hair splitting!  Isn't this just wording?

Obviously the math above is very simple. Most people, even when the rulebook uses post-dice math wording, will just mentally look at the above situation and go "ah I need a 6" - kinda converting it into pre-dice math on their own.

However as someone who has to grade kids work, the second way is kinda "trickier" question - there's an extra step and more busywork involved.  And we're trying to make dice rolls and rules quicker and more clear.

So - we should just re-word rules so it uses pre-roll math aka target numbers? 

There are other considerations though.

Pre-dice math (modifying the target result) has a disadvantage in that the results (and stats) tend to be more strictly limited to what is on the dice.  

What is "on the dice?" If you use target numbers on a d6, you are limited to stats of 1-6. Or probably 2-5 if you want a chance to succeed/fail i.e. if  a stat/target number is ever 1+ you will always succeed on a d6, on a target/stat of 7+ you will always fail.

I do think modifying target numbers dice tends to work better with bigger dice (my current craze is d12 - gives plenty of stat/modifier variation without the extreme feel of 'swing' of d20). You need 'room' to modify target numbers. I.e. on a d12 you could have stats of 4,5,6,7,8 and leave plenty of room for 1/-2/+1/+2 modifiers etc without hitting the "ends" of the dice.

An example of a limitation of the target number method is by changing the target number it's harder to make crits more or less likely.

Post-dice math tends (in my experience) to be more associated with shenanigans for crits i.e. "you exceeded the 4+ by 2" and exploding dice. These are not a hard and fast rules of course; but more how I see it used in practice.  

I think what I'm trying to say here is there are still advantages and disadvantages for each method, despite "pre-roll math" aka target numbers being more "clean" or streamlined. It's not automatically "best" every time.

The Dice is Right

Regardless of your method, using the right size dice is important, whether you plan to modify the target number or the dice themselves.

D6 are very limited. Most modern games use them in handfuls, adding or subtracting the the dice themselves rather than modifying the dice result or target number:

Example: instead of rolling a 4+ on a d6 and -2, you might roll 4 d6s with 4+ succeeding, then remove 2 dice so you roll less dice, but the target/dice required (4+) remains the same.

This gives the pleasing sensation of chugging handfuls of dice (well, my kids enjoy it) while avoiding the limited scope of d6s. Target number/pre-roll math is closest to this modern method, which you could call "add/remove dice" + "fixed target number" method. Newer GW games like Kill Team and Warcry kinda lean in this direction. You're not changing the number to roll, but the amount of dice you roll.

But why limit things to d6?  d20s, d12s, d10s, d8s, d4s - these are all available in normal department stores or videogame shops like EB Games - it's not the 70s, they are mainstream now (no one thinks you are using them in D&D to summon eldritch forces into the real world) and available for a few dollars. Nerd stuff is mainstream!

My rule of thumb is "if the results/modifiers are regularly going "off the dice" then it's time to upsize your dice. E.g. in my tankmunda game, I've used d6s as I didn't think I "needed" d10s etc - and it felt 'neat' to throw 3 different coloured d6 together which scored to-hit, penetration and location at the same time. But.... if I've got 3+, 4+ and 5+ to hit stats and I have modifiers for cover, range and crew damage, then quite a lot of times I'm going to need a number higher than 6...

Otherwise we end up with GW nonsense where you have to roll a 6 then another number i.e. a target of 7 is a 6 then a 4+, a target of 8 is a 6 then a 6+, etc. An uneccessarily complex two-stage process to deal with a problem that no longer exists.

Sunday, 12 July 2026

15mm and Scale Compression

One thing I always like about 15mm is even if you use 24" shoot/6" move it 'looks' right.

Unlike 28mm where it seems like a nerf gun could out-range them. I mean, if a 28mm/1" mini is ~2m then guns if to scale would have a hard cap at 24"x2 = ~50m extreme range!

 However I'm about to commit the same sin I decry. You see my tankmunda tank-centric warbands of ~6 tanks need a compressed scale to fit.

I say 24" is ~1000m or the 'normal' range most armour/gun values are measured at. Upper range depends on the gun - higher velocity bigger guns like 88mm PaK would shoot to 48" (2km) where most normal 75s would cap at 36" (1.5km). This allows bigger guns to reliably out-range and out-shoot on our 4x4 or 4x6 table and 'fits' with conventional wargame ranges. 

However, I am using small squads of infantry. They are used to seize objectives and loot aka "scrap" - a catch all for valuable resources in the post-apocolptic landscapes of the 1930s-40s, where overuse of gas in WW1 has created a hellscape of mutants and zombies.  

The aim is a mix of Frostgrave/relic hunting and Dropfleet Commander using vehicles to ferry troops. 

Now if 12" is 500m that makes normal small arms ranges quite short! Even for 15mm...

Support weapons like sniper rifles or LMGs might go 18".... 

I kinda handwave the short ranges in tanks as vision in WW2 era tanks was very restricted. And given most tanks can comfortably shoot across most of the table anyway (albeit at a penalty if over 24") shooting tends to pivot more on crew skill (pass crew test to acquire targets or get extra actions to aim carefully).

But 15mm rifles shooting 12" irks me as much as 28mm rifles shooting 24". 

Also there's infantry spotting range to consider - stationary infantry in cover may not even be visible at 500m especially if I use some sort of "gone to ground"/hide mechanic where you forgo shooting to regroup/stay safe. 

So normal rifle guys exchange fire at 12" (500m) but are safe beyond it. If someone hides/goes to ground they might only be able to engaged at 6" (250m) or less! Given the game is designed around tanks, it's probably OK. Infantry are mostly to hold objectives and retrieve warpstone/relics/scrap so they probably should be hard to spot and wrinkle out of ruins and heavy cover. 

I count 15mm troops as .5 of a mini so we've got +65 US and Soviet troops painted this holidays bringing my 2026 total to 748. ....and I still haven't cracked open my Frostgrave plastics for the Forest/medieval STALKER warbands...

OK some quick rules. 

Troops are in fire teams of 4-5; or less for a weapons/sniper team.

Say 3+ or 4+ to hit (-1 cover, -1 if suppressed) with troop training making a "save" of say 3+ (veteran) 4+ (regular) or 5+ (green). Maybe save modifiers of +1 if in cover, +1 if heavy armour.  Normal rifles shoot 12" x1, SMGs 6"x2, and LMGs 18"x3-4. So far, so very Bolt Action/Flames of War/40K.

Troops can either move or shoot in any phase of the tank turn. Movement is 4" (or 3" if armoured).  

If troops take any hits (even if saved) they are suppressed, and must make a crew check (3+.4+ or 5+) in order to move or shoot: or else they skip their turn to recover/remove the suppression (hiding and recovering). One suppression token per source of hits (Bolt Action?) = you only get one suppression max for each unit per phase attacking regardless of hits.

If troops take any casualties once have taken 50% or more; pass a crew check or remove unit. Likewise if suppression tokens exceed current troops in unit.

Some sort of 'hide'/'recover' order where perhaps you can re-roll any saves to block hits but can still accrue suppression normally? Maybe to 'recover' roll a crew check for each suppression token and remove one each success. That way better troops survive and function under pressure better and recover faster.

Ok pretty generic but I literally recalled invented them as I typed. Creativity is overrated - the aim here is to be easy to explain, and 'slot-in' to existing rules. In addition, I can be pretty confident it will work out the box with perhaps a +1/-1 modifier here or there to tune the lethality.
 

These 15mm are painted too dark. They need to go 'one shade brighter' but I haven't got to that yet as I got bored with their teensy details and I have school planning to do. Still count as tableworthy, but I'll probably circle back to them when I'm in the mood. Still have 30 or so insurgents/Chechyans/Soviet militia to go....

Hmm while12" gun range irks me, it may be OK themastically. In the post-apocalyptic 1930s-40s world, troops are transported by tank or halftrack to their destination, which is invariably scavenging in city ruins, so there is a much higher proportion of armour, as well as gasmasks/NBC-esque gear and automatic CQB weapons. Think the mech suits from Fallout or Soviet engineers in breastplates with SMGs. I'm largely using GZG sci fi infantry in the role. 

Monday, 6 July 2026

15mm is Back, Baby!

Unfortunately for my STALKER/Mordhiem "Forest" project, all 5 boxes of the miniatures arrived at the same time, due to delays (instead of arriving spaced out over a month). Combined with the lack of instructions, this has paralysed me with indecision (I have 5-6 warbands to create, shared from the boxes).

Then, I got a Black Seas started box (the pirate craze continues) and assembled them, but lost momentum when looking at rigging them.

So... I needed to regain momentum, and where better than the scale where I have a 99% completion rate at painting? Tomorrow's War, Gruntz, FAD, Dirtside were where I really expanded away from the sphere of GW, Battletech, Warmachine in the early 2010s and 15mm was the scale I used. There was a wide range of manaufacturers - GZG, Rebel, Khurasan, Blue Moon, and (now defunct) Critical Mass Games.  

I count 15mm as .5 of a model, so +25 today is 683 models painted so far in 2026. I also painted the bases of another 200+ 15mm infantry and assembled 10 sailing ships so I am steadily progressing despite my low official numbers this month....

It also solved another dilemma I had. In my Mortal Tank Engines/WW2 tanks+zombies/Fallout/Mad Max universe of mercenary tank platoons, I wasn't sure how to base my infantry. In a FoW block, or individually like the sci fi above? 

Digging through my sci fi collection, I realized the FoW squad-on-1-base just didn't spark joy. The big square bases dwarf the boring drab WW2 minis. 15mm is a scale more focussed on vehicles than infantry, and 15mm WW2 infantry is dull even by 15mm standards. So why was I using WW2 infantry? Exactly. 

I've decided to use much cooler and more distinct sci fi infantry alongside my WW2 tanks. It also makes my universe more distinct, not just rebadged WW2. Also means I already have plenty of minis painted ready-to-rock. Still need some 15mm werewolves and zombies, though...


 I cunningly bought my daughter a label machine for her birthday which she enjoys using...

I've got quite a lot of sci fi armies. Back before postage cost more than the minis, you could get a platoon of 30-40 infantry and a handful of vehicles (basically a 40K army) for $70-80. At the time, it was cheaper than a single 40K tank. 

I shudder to think of what the weight of metal in the boxes above would cost to post in 2026... 

You get a lot of toys for your buck (probably still do if you live close to the manufacturer) and storage is great.

Something I dislike in wargames is a very "fixed" universe where all the background is coloured in for you in immense detail. Like 40K, or Battletech, or LoTR. You feel there is a"right" and "wrong" way to paint stuff or build armies. Inspiration is good, but too much fluff can stifle creativity.

 

For example, this army has mostly GZG troops but the mechs are suits from DUST (28mm!) and the metal chicken walkers from some unknown indie manufacturer.


This not-Soviet army uses GZG infantry and vehicles from Khurasan (not 100% sure of the mech but I bet it's a John Bear Ross sculpt).  

I also discovered some unpainted modern 15mm (Peter Pig?) which are now sitting on my bench. I always disliked the scale of Bolt Action (24" range rifles for 28mm just looks 'off') but with 15mm the 24" shooting range looks fine and allows vehicles to fit in better....  I wonder how much a Konflikt 47 rulebook costs...