Elite Infantry

[Genghis]

I enjoyed reading the Yeoman Guard list (& was suitable inspired to get a set of the rather splendid little chaps), but it got me thinking about the SV/FV of elite infantry. 

Looking through the various lists, it seems that pretty much all trained soldiers are SV/FV +2, which does seem a good baseline level.  However, there's no SV/FV distinction between a run-of-the-mill rifleman from a line infantry regt, the more selective Prince of Wales' Extraordinary Coy and the elite of the elite Yeoman Guard.  (Admittedly, with Tough & 4+ pluck, the Yeoman Guard  are much harder to put down; but they're no better at shooting or scrapping.)

What are other people's thoughts on the SV/FV of elite infantry?  Would +3 draw a better line between the elite and the regulars?  (When I was drafting my list for time travelling SS commandos, I upped their SV to +3 on that basis that these girls were a cut or 2 above the average with their shooting.)

[Dewbakuk]

Generally, your elite regiment wouldn't be any better at shooting than a line regiment as individuals. The difference would be down to training etc which is better represented by Talents than a stat increase. Give them Marksman or Skirmisher etc to represent specialisms. That being said, if you want a company raised from the best shots from all the regiments, there is no reason why not to do it.

[Craig]

I see no problem with you pitching your elites with a +3 in fighting or shooting. Once you give them +3 in both we are starting to move into more heroic status more usually associated with Leaders or Special Characters.

The way we designed it an average soldier should be Pluck 5+, FV+1, SV+1, Speed +0. Experienced/veteran soldiers, or those with exceptional training, i.e. the regular infantry of the Great Powers are more the FV+2, SV+2 type and often have a specialist talent as Dewbakuk suggests. Bayonet Drill, Engineer, Marksman, Medic, Skirmisher and Tough are all common choices.

However, one of the core philosophies of IHMN is to give players the creative power to do as they wish as long as their fellow players agree.

[Genghis]

Good points raised there, I got a little fixated on the SV/FV and didn't really consider the talents on top.  I guess one of the constraints of a 6-sided die system though is that it's tricky to give a subtle edge to elite soldiers over their regular (but well-trained) compatriots.

That said, my personal view is that proper SF-level elites (is SAS/SBS rather than 'just' paras/marines in today's parlance) should be at least on par with an average Sgt (ie +3), but I can see how that would start getting tricky from a balance/points cost perspective.  To paraphrase Craig, however consenting adults want to interpret his system...

[Craig]

I guess one of the constraints of a 6-sided die system though is that it's tricky to give a subtle edge to elite soldiers over their regular (but well-trained) compatriots.

IHMN is based on the ten-sided die... 

[Genghis]

IHMN is based on the ten-sided die... 

Curses, so it is.  Don't I feel stupid now...    (That's what happens when you get excited planning company lists but have not actually played the game yet.)   

[Craig]

 

The old In the Emperor's Name 40K skirmish rules, from whence IHMN came, was based on a d6 and suffered precisely the issues you proposed above. This is why we moved to a d10 for IHMN.

[Genghis]

Maybe you need to move to D20 so that well-trained soldiers are +4 and the elite units are +5...   

[Dewbakuk]

Having played d20 Wargames quite a bit, GASLIGHT being a prime example within period, they're not good. While the bell curve is nice the dice are too big to roll amongst troops with more than half a dozen figures each and the variance isn't usually necessary.

We've had this discussion quite a few times amongst local players and while lots of people just 'like' the d6, everyone generally agreed that the d10 is probably best. Far better bell curve than a d6 and not as unwieldy as a d20. Particularly when rolling a bunch of dice, which while often not necessary mathematically, people just seem to like doing

[copeab]

The old In the Emperor's Name 40K skirmish rules, from whence IHMN came, was based on a d6 and suffered precisely the issues you proposed above. This is why we moved to a d10 for IHMN.

Was much consideration given to 2d6 (or 2d6-2, or something similar)?

No, I won't suggest 3d4-2 ...

[Craig]

Was much consideration given to 2d6 (or 2d6-2, or something similar)?

No, I won't suggest 3d4-2 ...

Balancing the 2d6 bell curve is a mathematical feat I have tried in the past and mostly failed I'm afraid. Using 1d10 is simple and elegant.

[copeab]

Balancing the 2d6 bell curve is a mathematical feat I have tried in the past and mostly failed I'm afraid. Using 1d10 is simple and elegant.

Most games I know of don't try to balance the curve; a +1 stays a +1 no matter what the roll is.

[Dr DeAth]

I hate to be a pedant, but a single die, be it d6, d10 or d20 doesn't have a bell curve, it's a flat line.  The probability of rolling any score on a single dice is 1 in N, where N is the number of faces on the die, e.g. 1 in 10 for a d10.

You only get a bell curve when you add the result of two or more dice together.

Modifiers also don't actually change the bell curve, they just shift it left or right, the probability of scoring a given number remains the same; e.g. rolling 2d6 unmodified is most likely to score 7, (of the 36 possible outcomes, 6 result in a total of 7) if you have a +1 modifier then the most likely score is going to be 8 (7+1), the probability of each outcome remains the same, it's just the outcome (score) that changes.

Modifiers typically just increase or decrease the likely hood that you're going to achieve a specific score; so if you need 7+ to hit on a d10, you have a 40% likelihood of a hit (4 of the 10 outcomes are 7+).  If you have a +6 modifier then the likelihood of a hit is 100%, a -7 modifier means the likelihood is 0%. Other modifiers give you something in between.

The difference between a single die roll and a pair/multiple is that you are less likely to get the extreme results (upper and lower scores) with multiple dice than you are with a single die

 

[Dewbakuk]

Ooh, hark at her 

You are of course correct (although anyone who plays Settlers of Catan can tell you 6 and 8 come up more than 7). Does it not become a bell curve when there are numerous available modifiers, some of which are more common than others? Or is it still flat?

[copeab]

Ooh, hark at her 

You are of course correct (although anyone who plays Settlers of Catan can tell you 6 and 8 come up more than 7). Does it not become a bell curve when there are numerous available modifiers, some of which are more common than others? Or is it still flat?

With one die, it's flat. Modifiers just shift the maximum, average, and minimum results.

OTOH, flat rolls are easier for most players to grasp their chance of compared to bell curves.