Why no d18's?

[Bohandas]

I just tonight learned that d18's were not only a thing, but a thing that dates back quite a while and it got me wondering about why modern roleplaying games, with all their unusually numbered dice, don't seem to make any use of them.

Is it an oversight? Is it because it's considered too close to the d20 to make a difference? Is it because its not a platonic solid? Are they more expensive to manufacture than the other shapes? Is there some other reason?

Anyone have any info on this?

EDIT:
And on a tangentially related note, how come RPGs use d3's but not d5's; it seems like those should be the same principle as each other; one's a d6 divided by 2 and rounded up, the other's a d10 divided by 2 and rounded up

 

[Zardnaar]

It's what D&D used and it's what dice they found on a trip to Europe iirc.

 

[aramis erak]

EDIT:
And on a tangentially related note, how come RPGs use d3's but not d5's; it seems like those should be the same principle as each other; one's a d6 divided by 2 and rounded up, the other's a d10 divided by 2 and rounded up

The games I've seen using d5's tend to use only d10's... albeit often in d100 mode and occasionally d1000 mode
The BI/FFG 40K line uses only d10's... and did so as an outgrowth of...
WFRP 2E.... which moved to d10's only...
FASA Trek d10's only.

Most games using d3's are either d6 only, d6 & d20, or d6 and d10 (usually percentile).

The thing is, d5 is a hassle most of the time. The only game I've played where the D3 was used often enough as a d3 to make having a physical one was Hero System.... Tho' Fudge and Fate technically uses 4d3-8 by default...

 

[Thakazum]

People are stuck in their ways. Any deviation from the normal polyhedral set is met with disdain. See reactions to DCC's "funky dice" (i.e. non-standard polyhedrals).

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[JeffB]

Gamers are so weird when it comes to dice (and a great many other things).They think nothing of a standard polyhedral set (which in the grand scheme of things ARE weird) But god forbid you mention having to use DCC's extended set or "Special" dice like FFG Star Wars or whatever- the comments get ridiculous- "Heresy, I would NEVER play a game with those...." :indignantlookwithnoseheldhigh:

Then again Ken St. Andre & Marc Miller balked at the Polyhedral set- so that's really hardcore.

Personally I love DCC's dice step system utilizing all the "Weird" polyhedrals for multiple actions (and especially it's usage for the Warrior class) and FFG's dice system is brilliant and takes about one session to learn. I'm guessing TOR and FATE would be the same.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I have d14s, d16s, d18s, d22s, d24s, and d30s.

If I still played 3.x, with its dice scaling, they'd be very handy since I could smooth out that progression (rather than having 1d12 jump to - what was it - 2d8?). As it is, I don't think I've ever had occasion to use them, but I periodically consider the idea of making a game that does (not for distribution, just for fun). I suppose I could just play DCC (which I would love, but I haven't had any luck selling it to any of my groups).

As for why they aren't used? A d20, with its 5% increments, is good for basic resolution. It's easy to work with. As for damage dice, even a d12 is very swingy. It's not that the d14-d18 range is worthless, but it is kind of specialized. Very swingy, without the ease of use of the d20s increments.

Also from what I understand, the molds used to make the dice can be quite expensive, so without much demand it's a very niche market that isn't necessarily going to be worth the expense using traditional models.

This is the KS I backed a few years ago, which was for manufacturing d14s and d18s. That worked, obviously, since with KS you can raise the money for the molds using what amount to presales. They talk a little bit about the process, in case you're interested. Spherical D14 and D18 - the missing even-sided Game Dice

 

[Umbran]

Is it an oversight? Is it because it's considered too close to the d20 to make a difference? Is it because its not a platonic solid? Are they more expensive to manufacture than the other shapes? Is there some other reason?

Well, for one thing, a d18 is not terribly different, in terms of odds, than a d20: 5.555...% per side, instead of 5% per side. Half a percent isn't compelling.

But also - while there are a handful of examples of strange dice, the vast majority of games use something in the d4,d6,d8,d10,d12,d20 set. Since the 80s, those dice have been fairly common and easy to get. Anything outside that - you need to produce those dice, and expect your new players to buy them, before they can play your game. Your dice mechanic has to be really special to make that a winning proposition. A small variation in the odds granularity is not very special.

EDIT:
And on a tangentially related note, how come RPGs use d3's but not d5's;

Well, in general... they don't. Compared to the number of games extant, the number who use d3s is... very small.

 

[Bohandas]

Well, for one thing, a d18 is not terribly different, in terms of odds, than a d20: 5.555...% per side, instead of 5% per side. Half a percent isn't compelling.

But also - while there are a handful of examples of strange dice, the vast majority of games use something in the d4,d6,d8,d10,d12,d20 set. Since the 80s, those dice have been fairly common and easy to get. Anything outside that - you need to produce those dice, and expect your new players to buy them, before they can play your game. Your dice mechanic has to be really special to make that a winning proposition. A small variation in the odds granularity is not very special.



Well, in general... they don't. Compared to the number of games extant, the number who use d3s is... very small.

Dungeons & Dragons uses d3s. For unarmed damage and a number of other things.

 

[Umbran]

Dungeons & Dragons uses d3s. For unarmed damage and a number of other things.

In 5e, unarmed damage is 1+ Strength modifier.