« first day (4514 days earlier)      last day (443 days later) » 

Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
12:03 AM
@Alan easiest way is typically to flag a comment and leave a custom message for the mods to move the the thread to a chat.
The other way is here:
2
A: Is there a way I can make "Let us continue this discussion in chat" happen sooner?

Thomas MarkovA Community Manager, Catija, explained how it works in these network posts: Where's the auto-move-to-chat link? (CodeReview.SE) How is the message 'Please avoid extended discussions in comments' triggered? (MSE) Quoting Catija's response from this second link: I had the opportunity to answer a...

 
Alan
Alan
12:26 AM
@ThomasMarkov Got it, I was trying avoid getting into an extended conversation in comments as I didn't think that was appropriate
Meanwhile, the combination of the 3.5 questions last night and the telepathic druid question now reminded me of a character I always wanted to play and never got the chance. Has to start at like level 8 minimum to make it work, and maybe even higher to afford the key magic item....and the sad thing is, it wasn't even that powerful at that point. But it amused me so :)
Faerun, a ghostwise halfling from the Chultan peninsula, arcane heirophant with a ring of invisibility who rode his dinosaur companion/familiar while staying permanently invisible and doing nothing but buff spells on the apparently telepathic dinosaur :)
 
Joshua
Joshua
12:52 AM
Unwise to use fireball spell in coal mine
 
BESW
BESW
"Unmapped Character Changes" by bankuei on Deeper in the Game
Tabletop Games by Global South Designers a collection by Cezar Capacle. Every tabletop game I can find by creators from the Global South.
 
Alan
Alan
@Joshua A friend in a GURPS fantasy game got attacked by an otyugh tentacle while in the privy. He jumped up and cast a 1d6 fireball.....
 
linksassin
linksassin
1:27 AM
@Alan The community is open to answers with relevant anecdotes. Nobody is suggesting your answer isn't an appropriate answer post or even a low quality one. Downvotes can (and regularly do) simply indicate that users don't think it is a good solution to the problem.
 
Alan
Alan
@linksassin Hmm. Alright then. I have no particular interest in debating whether it's good or not, I just was concerned with the thought that it wasn't considered appropriate/quality issue.
 
linksassin
linksassin
There's nothing wrong with your answer from a style or support perspective, it's a perfectly valid answer to how you have solved the issue at your table. However some users feel that it isn't a good solution to OPs question and therefore downvoted it. And TBH I agree with them. I feel your solution doesn't solve the crux of the issue and also results in un-even less fun gameplay in a way that's at best no better than the original issue and at worse a bigger problem.
 
Alan
Alan
nod I thought the crux of the issue was people unhappy about unbalanced character at the table. And I am completely fine with people not liking it or thinking it wouldn't work for them or their table. All I know is it worked for mine, we liked it, it seemed appropriate, so I put it up there. I'm fine with it sitting at the bottom of the answer queue for it
 
Hot RPG Questions
Hot RPG Questions
1:49 AM
5
Q: When a Summoner uses Act Together for 3 actions, do they need to do an activity worth 3 actions or can they take 3 actions individually?

Luis FernandezThe "Act Together" activity reads: You and your eidolon act as one. Either you or your eidolon takes an action or activity using the same number of actions as Act Together, and the other takes a single action. For example, if you spent 2 actions to Act Together, you could cast burning hands (2 a...

pathfinder-2e summoner eidolon
 
Hot RPG Questions
Hot RPG Questions
2:38 AM
2
Q: How to handle rolled stats when I think one player cheated on theirs?

ArgoMy group uses 4d6 drop lowest for stat generation. The other players feel that the rolled stats of one of the other players are 'too good' in comparison to their rolls and I'm not certain that they actually did roll those numbers. (None of the other players rolled in front of the group, but their...

dnd-5e gm-techniques character-creation problem-players cheating
 
Alan
Alan
2:48 AM
Whelp, I deleted it. Just one final clarification: Not trying to debate community standards or values of the answer, just understand them better. Now I have a better grasp.
 
 
4 hours later…
Alan
Alan
6:38 AM
Okay, I don't want to be told not to answer in comments. I also don't want to take the time and effort it would take to turn this into more than a one sentence answer. Anyone care to elaborate on "It's your table, do whatever is fun for your players/aka Rule 0" to rpg.stackexchange.com/q/204602/71804
 
 
3 hours later…
Trish
Trish
9:09 AM
@ThomasMarkov if you have input on a specific topic on the Maintenance questions... I separated out and pointed to the actual questions that are a problem, providing a possible solution idea for them.
 
 
2 hours later…
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
11:12 AM
 
Feeds
Feeds
11:34 AM
Global South Shoutout: Grannies in space!
posted on February 08, 2023 by Cezar Capacle

Armanda Haller, from Argentina, talks about GRANDMOTHERSHIP

 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
@doppelgreener gonna post a meta over at bcg meta, the rules tag is back
 
doppelgreener
doppelgreener
good move
 
 
1 hour later…
NautArch
NautArch
1:15 PM
@Alan If you still believe in your answer, you should keep it up. Although I think there's a badge for removing it.
I've got some downvoted answers still up because I believe in them.
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
1:38 PM
 
SmokeDetector
SmokeDetector
1:50 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of answer, potentially bad asn for hostname in answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (66): Are bags of holding fireproof?‭ by deewanimastani‭ on rpg.SE (@Rubiksmoose @ThomasMarkov @linksassin @AncientSwordRage @Akixkisu)
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
ayyy theres smokey
 
Hot RPG Questions
Hot RPG Questions
4
Q: Can a Githyanki silver sword be used as a means to kill a lich or other similar "immortal" being?

Kronos last name not importantI've been thinking of an idea for a campaign where the adventuring party must find pieces of a weapon: a sword that would be used to slay a lich, as it has the power to destroy a persons soul. When it is completely forged, it reveals itself to be a Githyanki silver sword that they then have to us...

dnd-5e magic-items weapons magic artifacts
 
NautArch
NautArch
@ThomasMarkov Just fixed the headers on one of mine - I even kept it up after I was convinced it wasn't correct because I think it's good to have that argument visible.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
2:49 PM
@Alan The simple answer it to just have the whole table use the best array. But I am not going to answer that question because the OP demonstrates a lack of basic numerancy.
 
NautArch
NautArch
@KorvinStarmast That's AnnaAGs answer. I've actually never heard of that before.
Although it makes me say "why not just pick an array"
If you've got 3+ people rolling and picking the best, then just pick an array everyone likes - why the need for random rolls?
@ThomasMarkov Just making sure I understand this, because @Trish's answers seems to say the opposite.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@NautArch Honestly, that answer has been offered on this Stack in the past, and I have seen this suggestion discussed at GitP many times. And we just did this for an upcoming campaign that I am in on Foundry (the third campaign for this group). All four of us rolled an array, and the group picked one. It ended up being the array that I rolled in Discord. 13, 15, 12, 15, 12, 11 (4d6 drop 1)
 
NautArch
NautArch
Or if you want "better" rolls, then reroll 1s. But if it makes your group happy,that's all that's really important.
But if you don't want variability and do like rolling dice, I guess it's a reasonable solution for different, but good, stats for everyone.
Also noticed Kvothe put basically the same comment on everyone's answer about AnnaAGs answer...should I flag those as unnecessary?
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@NautArch My nephew had a different approach, and I adopted it for my Saltmarsh campaign.
 
NautArch
NautArch
@KorvinStarmast Do tell!
 
Trish
Trish
2:56 PM
@NautArch hm? where?
 
NautArch
NautArch
@Trish I may have read yours wrong - were you saying it's improbable or probable?
I thought yours was saying it was unlikely, and Thomas' assessment was that it was well within likely.
But I may have misinterpreted either/both.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@NautArch It is in one of my answers. I'll get you a link.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch I say it is a statistic outlier that can happen but is not very likely. It is outside of the 90% confidence interval of what is expected but it is not impossible. However, it can indicate cheating, which is why I say "talk to them but don't accuse them" or swap to a method that has no rolling.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
2
A: How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?

KorvinStarmastA Method To Use For Rolling Dice My nephew (D&D 5e campaign) had us roll up characters using 4d6 drop 1 (the default method in the PHB) arranged to fit abilities as desired. His boundaries were: "If your total ability bonus score total is +10 or greater, either re-roll or modify a roll down ...

 
NautArch
NautArch
@Trish Okay, so I did read yours right - now I have to see if I read @ThomasMarkov analysis of @Someone_Evil's and HighDiceRollers number crunching.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
3:00 PM
What I did in Salt Marsh was had each player roll their own array, and then I did an analysis of how many +'s each array had. That gave me a rough "mean" - for one character I added a +1 to one of his stats since his array had been two +'s below the mean. When V2Blast, and when MikeQ, rolled up their characters (they joined at different times) I compared them to all of the other arrays and in one case made a single point adjustment with the player's concurrence.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch with some players you can see if they cheated by how they react to "hey, that's an exceptional score spread."
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@NautArch I have tended to tune encounters up since they hit level 5 and with a few exceptions it has worked out. I gooned-up the Juvenile Kraken encounter thanks to not getting the 'hiding in the inky blackness' tactic right. Just me running the monster incorrectly.
 
NautArch
NautArch
@KorvinStarmast Ah, gotcha. That's an interesting system.
I still much prefer the ease of standard array +2 to each stat.
@KorvinStarmast I've come more into adding more options to my monsters and using the combat to be a fun encounter and not just a slog fight. Putting in a 50% HP action, rechargeable options, have them interact with players beyond the stat block.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@NautArch My first 5e DM had a different approach. Roll an array. If no single score is 16 or better, re roll (all of it) if you'd like to.
That worked out fine.
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
@NautArch 1% is not a low enough probability for me to consider the possibility of cheating.
 
NautArch
NautArch
3:23 PM
@Trish Why do you think that is low enough for cheating?
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
Yeah, 1% means it has almost certainly happened at my tables numerous times.
 
NautArch
NautArch
3:38 PM
@Trish Might be easier to discuss here, but I don't see your 'exceptional rolls'. From what Thomas is saying - it isn't exceptional.
And yes, I am trusting the mathematician here.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch I don't say that. It's low enough to warrant attention as exceptional, not as cheating.
 
NautArch
NautArch
You keep saying that, but is that your judgement or mathematically correct?
 
Trish
Trish
that'S the math.
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
@NautArch That's just a matter of opinion. For me, I'm just thinking about how many characters I have made using 4d6 and how many people I've played with, it just seems highly likely I've encountered legitimate score sets at least that good not just once, but on a few occasions.
 
Trish
Trish
the math says: 1.21% of those statistic rolls sum up to 89-108
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
3:41 PM
So my opinion about how the word "exceptional" ought to be used is that this isn't a rare enough occurrence to call it exceptional.
 
NautArch
NautArch
@ThomasMarkov Gotcha, my apologies for putting more weight on that.
 
Trish
Trish
one player in 82 has such stats. That's at least "RARE"
 
NautArch
NautArch
What's 'normal'?
To compare that against for 4d6 drop lowest?
Your comparison against the standard array I'm not sure is relevant.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch in mathematics? 95% confidence interval.
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
It means that if each person currently in this room DM'd two groups of three players, we would expect at least one of us to encounter an array at least that good.
 
Trish
Trish
3:44 PM
@NautArch Or rather: Median of 73.47 with a standard deviation area of 66.5 to 80.44
THAT is normal in a mathematical sense
 
NautArch
NautArch
And what's the percentage chance of rolling all 15s?
 
Trish
Trish
@ThomasMarkov 14 people, 28 groups, 84 characters, not counting spares or dropped.
@NautArch 15*6=90... exactly 89 is 0.43%, exactly 90 is 0.29%.
 
NautArch
NautArch
ANd 15 is the median roll? So that should be the 'most common' percentage? Or is my math really really bad?
Because right now, it seems like only you and OP think this array is exceptional enough to consider cheating.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch The anydice I run there runs 6 times "4d6 drop Lowest" and does not care if it is 6*15 or 4*15, 14, 16. The mid of a test is irrelevant, they balance out.
 
NautArch
NautArch
I guess I"m trying to ask what the expected average roll is, and what percentage chance there is of getting the average. Or is that not a good methodology?
 
Trish
Trish
3:51 PM
like, 18-18-14-13-13-13 is just as much an 89 as any other array.
 
NautArch
NautArch
Then what does the value you're using do?
I'm very confused.
 
Trish
Trish
Ok.
 
NautArch
NautArch
I thought you added the values together and then gave us the probability of getting that total value?
 
Trish
Trish
yes
 
NautArch
NautArch
So I'm trying to get the baseline probability of an average roll.
 
Trish
Trish
3:52 PM
no,
you get the baseline probability for a sum
that does not care for the exact array you rolled, as each distinct array has a too small chance to say anything. By just going for the sum, I get rid of noise
 
NautArch
NautArch
Okay, but the baseline probabilty of OP's player is .74%. And the value for rolling the averages gives you a probability of .43%?
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch no
the player statistics have a sum of 93
they also get +2/+1 on two statistics.
 
NautArch
NautArch
Am I reading this wrong?
21 hours ago, by Someone_Evil
@ThomasMarkov I'm getting 0.74% by calcing "at least this good" using an extended pointbuy list
21 hours ago, by HighDiceRoller
@Someone_Evil @ThomasMarkov I get the same: https://highdiceroller.github.io/icepool/apps/ability_scores.html?num_dice=4&die_size=6&reroll_dice=0&num_keep=3&modifier=0&num_ability_repeat=1&num_abilities=6&min_ability=3&max_ability=18&num_arrays=1&p3=0&p4=0&p5=0&p6=0&p7=0&p8=0&p9=1&p10=2&p11=3&p12=4&p13=5&p14=7&p15=9&p16=12&p17=16&p18=20
 
Trish
Trish
So they actually rolled an 89. Any array that sums to 89, be it 18-18-14-13-13-13 or 16-15-15-15-14-14-14. The latter of the two is more likely than the first, but both are inclöuided in the 0.43% for exactly 89-.
open anydice.com/program/2d95e and look at [Table] [Normal]. What does 89 read to you? That's the probability that rolling the 6 stats comes to a sum of 89.
 
NautArch
NautArch
I'm confused again - if the sum isn't helpful, then why are we using sum to figure out of this is reasonable?
 
Trish
Trish
4:01 PM
the exact array isn't helpful - there are too many options. The sum is helpful
 
NautArch
NautArch
I do wonder what the other players rolled and what the odds were of their results.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch probably between the 66 to 80 that are in the "most likely" interval
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
I'm pretty sure straight sum and point buy sum aren't gonna give the exact same results
Certainly be careful about keeping it clear what sum you're talking about
 
Trish
Trish
@Someone_Evil as I explained, point-buy-sum can't work - too many points in the array in question
I only argue with the sum of the array in question, after throwing out the racial modifier (+2/+1 for a total of 3)
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
I haven't read all the way back, but that statement doesn't really make sense to me
 
Trish
Trish
4:16 PM
the array in question has 17, 16, 16, 15, 14, 14. Assuming that there is a +2/+1 in that, you'd need to have a 16, 15, 15, 15, 14, 14. You can't generate that array with point buy on page 14 of the phb: there is no way to generate a 16. Also, the other statistics but the 16 would cost 32 points, when you have 27.
as for statistics, any array that sums up to exactly 89 has a chance of 0.43%. 89-108 are 1.21%, if generated with 6 times 4d6-drop-lowest.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
Two points to the above, I didn't account for the +2/+1 (if one wishes rerun it with the anydice code) and I used an extended point buy table (again, see the anydice code)
Methodologically, it's looking at how many points you'd need to buy the rolled array. I believe that's a bit more of common method with PF1e? Or at least I think we have a Q on it
 
Trish
Trish
@Someone_Evil accounting for the racial modifier (which is a flat +3 on the statistic)... the array is worth 92 in anydice.com/program/2d986 - which is the same statistic, just shifted up by 3
@Someone_Evil Point buy was PFS mandatory. And I think AL allowed that or the standard array.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
When you're just looking at the sum, which I weren't
 
Trish
Trish
in either case, the point I want to make is, that while 1 in 82 has an array like that or better, it's still very unusual.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
PB Val wise I'm getting the prob - assuming the listed array had +2/+1 included in it - to be 4.37% (needing a point buy value of 53 to build that array)
 
Trish
Trish
4:28 PM
@Someone_Evil 53? Makes sense, the last 16 costs a lot... but how does it end with about 10 times the actual probability?
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
The difference is how you're looking at "at least that good"
 
Trish
Trish
what does pb VAl give for a sum of 77? wait, eh... PBval gives the chance for exactly that array, es?
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
Point buy equivalent and sum-of-scores are different ways to look at that
 
Trish
Trish
indeed.
I calculate with sum-of-scores.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
@Trish That's not a question with a single answer
There are many different arrays which sum to 77 and which may have different PBVs
 
Trish
Trish
4:31 PM
I don'T wuite trust the output of the Highdiceroller's statistics.
@Someone_Evil Indeed. a single 18 can be in with other low stats.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
A possibly important distinction is that PBV values single high rolls disproportionately higher than sum-of-scores does
@Trish What about my Anydice? Apparently they agree and it's not complicated code
 
Trish
Trish
@Someone_Evil I can'T quite finde that
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
 
Trish
Trish
I don'T quite think that that is right...
The output is 10 times too high...
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
That's very much assuming your method is the correct one
 
Alan
Alan
4:39 PM
@Trish I generally prefer the point buy for balancing rather than sum of scores, as the game values having an 18 and a 10 far more than having two 14s
 
Trish
Trish
The PBV of 53 seems correct, but the other number is too high... one sec...
anydice.com/program/2a1e - that's standard, right?
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
Yup, that's 4d6k1
 
Trish
Trish
16 = 7.25%. 15=10.11%. 14=12.27%
The probability of exactly that array is thus 0.0725 x 0.1011 x 0.1011 x 0.1011 x 0.1217 x 0.1217
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
Nope, combinatorics want a word with you
 
Trish
Trish
eh, yes, right...
that would be for that array in that order.
still, it must be lower than 5%
 
Alan
Alan
4:43 PM
@NautArch Assuming the 1.21% chance of getting that roll or higher, it takes about 57 rolls for the chance to see at least one stat distribution that high to reach 50%
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
We're not checking for exactly that result though, we're looking at "that good or better"
 
Trish
Trish
@Alan eh... no.
 
Alan
Alan
57 sets of 6 rolls that is
 
Trish
Trish
each test is independant, the next set will be exactly as likely as the last.
 
Alan
Alan
Yeah, so the chance of not seeing one is that high is .9879
the chance of not seeing one that high x times is .9879^x. Solving .9879^x=.50 is where I got that number from.
 
Trish
Trish
4:45 PM
@Someone_Evil jsut running 6 times the 4d6 drop lowest gives this= anydice.com/program/2d98b
exactly same array as running it with a 6d[highest 3 of 4d6]
 
Alan
Alan
I didn't want to go into a full poisson distribution of "When is the first time I'm likely to see that roll", so just finding the 50-50 point was easy
note that it's not ON the 57th roll. It's somewhere within 57 rolls, maybe more than once.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
@Trish Yes, and?
 
Trish
Trish
@Alan you mean to solve for the mean time to sea that roll
@Someone_Evil I still try to figure out why the PBV comes out with 10 times the chance...
 
Alan
Alan
Yeah, to solve for the mean time would be more than I have time to do so now. But one quick way of getting a feel for how rare something is to say "hmm, what would the 50/50 chance of someone getting something that good be have to be for me to give everyone the same chance." THis just says if you gave everyone 57 sets of stats to roll to pick their best, people would have a 50/50 chance of getting at least one that good
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
@Trish Example: Going by sum-of-scores 16, 15, 15, 15, 14, 14 and 17, 15, 15, 15, 14, 13 are equally good. PBV considers the latter better, because improving a 16 to a 17 is worth more than 13->14
 
Trish
Trish
4:49 PM
or rather... ah, there's a >= where ought to be a =, then it drops to 0.66, which is at least in the same ballpark as the 0.43
 
Alan
Alan
For context, a common way when I was playing 2D was for the DM to give everyone 3 sets of stats, pick their favorite
err, 2nd edition that is
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
@Trish We're looking for "that good or better" which is the relevant metric for "how good was this roll"
 
Trish
Trish
@Alan doesn't help with trying to figure out statistic differences here. hard crunch.
 
Alan
Alan
Although as usual, in probability there's absolutely no way of taking n=1 and determining if it was fake or not. Rare stuff happens all the time
Well, I have to be in the dentist in 10 minutes, will come back to see what folks have come up with :)
 
Trish
Trish
@Someone_Evil then I got to compare to the 1.21... you get out 4.37, I get 1.21... that's roughly a factor... 3.6?
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
4:54 PM
And?
 
Trish
Trish
in either case, it'S like one in about 170 to 230 that someone delivers that array.
Like said, that's an exceptional array.
since neither is sure which method is better here, I just include both...
 
Alan
Alan
Yep. It's tail end, but tail end stuff happens. Just ask anyone who ever played Rollmaster (a 1d100 system) how often nat 100s occured :)
It's fun to play around with the probabilities IMO, but pointless for the question at hand since there isn't enough of a sample size to tell if a tail end event is suspecct.
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
5:59 PM
How do I throw a bounty on a question again?
needs to get alan paid... ^.^
 
Mithical
Mithical
@PlayPatrice There should be a "start a bounty" link underneath the comment section on the question
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
All I see is add comment.
 
Mithical
Mithical
How old is the question?
 
NautArch
NautArch
@Someone_Evil So is Trish's math accurate here?
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
A couple days, but its been awnsered allready. Alans question isn't the "best" one, but its very mathmatically thurough. Wanted to throw him some extra reputation for the effort.
13
A: How does one Calculate Dual Variable Probability?

Ilmari KaronenIt helps to remember that, even when dealing with random variables, we're still allowed to move terms from one side of the (in)equality sign to the other (and change their sign). So this: $${\rm d}20 + M_A > {\rm d}20 + M_B \tag1$$ is equivalent to this: $${\rm d}20 - {\rm d}20 > M_B - M_A \tag2$...

 
NautArch
NautArch
6:04 PM
@PlayPatrice Have to wait until tomorrow. Needs 2 days of being open,
 
Mithical
Mithical
Yeah, the question needs to be at least 3 days old IIRC
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
Gotcha
Thank you!
 
NautArch
NautArch
@Trish I think the problem I have with your answer is it appears to try and prove they cheated because it's a tail result. But that isn't proof and I'm not sure it's actually helpful. Combine it with using it to 'talk' to the player, I'd honestly be worried about the GM I'm playing with and their lack of trust with me.
 
Trish
Trish
@NautArch which is exactly what I don't try to do. I try to point out that it is a possible result, but just has a low chance.
 
NautArch
NautArch
Isn't that already kinda known? I mean, the math is nice (if it's correct), but I'm not sure it's useful.
I think that's my point.
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
6:15 PM
@NautArch Yup, just tested a different metric to me, thus the different numbers
 
NautArch
NautArch
Cool, thank you!
Still not sure how useful it is, but good to now the math is right.
ALthough does the math actually mean the role is exceptional? Are you either rolling mean or exceptional?
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
6:37 PM
youtube.com/watch?v=8Ko3TdPy0TU Is probably the best explaination I'm aware of for the kind of maths/method we're talking about
 
Alan
Alan
@PlayPatrice I agree that the second answer presents the data better for the lay audience, but I also appreciate having the work shown up there so people can see how to approach problems like that in the future being appreciated :)
@PlayPatrice Also last night I found myself poking around 3.5 grapple stuff. If you really want to make the character more grapplable, there's lots of stuff you can do to get permanently enlarged, or enlarge on command. There's also playing a race other than human so you can alter self
 
Trish
Trish
@Someone_Evil which metric is better for the comparison is hard to tell, both point to "this is about as likely as drawing the one named super rare from a booster." for ballpark numbers.
 
Alan
Alan
With various levels of "use 3.0 vs 3.5 vs dragon magazine" stuff on the how to be a +0 LA outsider/etc. Like player's guide to faerun is perfectly 3.5 and has the otherworldly feat is in the completley solid 3.5 main book series line, and it goes down from there
To me, the more interesting and relevant question on the different statted characterss isn't "Is one of these cheating" but "Can/how do you have a fun game with characters at different stat levels." Since the core thing seemed to be DM and one player didn't and one was okay
 
Someone_Evil
Someone_Evil
@Trish Yup, it's possible one'd also want to extend my PBV table to account for scores below 8 (they're worth 0 in the above). Sorta depends on preference
 
NautArch
NautArch
Gandalfmeansme asked for confirmation on the stats (bonuses or not with bonuses)
I also asked for the players stats...I do wonder how they fall in the probability spectrum.
 
Trish
Trish
6:54 PM
@NautArch if it's before... then it is starting to be unbelievably low.
 
NautArch
NautArch
I still say it's not "unbelievably" low. In fact, only you and OP seem to think that.
Everyone else is providing anecdotal evidence of similar (or even lower probability) rolls.
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
@Alan honestly, the single best thing you can do for a grappler is grab a Goliath and do the LA buyoff later in his career. The big fun part about grapple is the lockdown that happens as a result. All those little "Gotcha" or gimicky support monsters in a "clever" encounter tend to get shut down pretty quick.
In our original game - the BBEG would literally start casting enlarge on his luitenands and captains or Big Chonkies (or give them appropriate items) specificially to shut me down (In context that it was campaign appropriate and the evil wizard was doing specific hard counters to us).
 
Alan
Alan
No matter how improbable it was, it'd prove absolutely nothing. n=1 is an anecdote, not data. So you're down to either "Everyone rolls in front of me" and people get upset they have to change, or deal with the stats that are there somehow
@PlayPatrice Yeah, fighting against a main bad guy who throws counters at you generally makes it bad to build your character as a one trick pony of any kind
 
NautArch
NautArch
@Alan Right - which is why I don't think the probability info is actually helpful - and possibly hurtful if used to try and 'show' why OP thinks a player cheated.
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
It was still a lot of fun. Its just with two weapon fighting - I was allways able to initate the grapple - and this with a flurry of blows followup I was able to get a pin every round. If they manage to break pin and grapple (eating at least two attacks) - the movement away from the grapple to seperate provokes an attack of opportunity
giving you a free shot to re-grab.
 
Alan
Alan
7:00 PM
These issues are why point buys became standard a while ago. Although my table and I really did like my "Stat whatever character you want to play" method
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
So its a serous action economy shurtdown.
 
NautArch
NautArch
@Alan My original table was all about rolling dice. Variability in scores was there, but no one had any issues. WHen we did a short campaign with 3d6 down the line, the variability was MASSIVE - but we still had a ton of fun.
 
Alan
Alan
I personally think a large part of the issue in the current controversy is that not all of the people at the table are in the "This is a cooperative game where we are all, DM and players, trying to have a good time together" mode rather than the competitive "I want my character to be the best and I don't care what impact that has on the fun of other people" omode
@NautArch Yep, and if your players had fun with that, it was the perfect system for your table :)
 
NautArch
NautArch
Now, I don't love the idea of having witnesses for rolling, and I'm not loving the variability as much. We use a standard array +2 and it's a ton of fun.
@Alan Not sure if "perfect" is the word I'd use - but it worked :)
We also weren't competitive with each other at the table, so maybe that helps (and isn't normal?)
 
Alan
Alan
nod I really enjoyed systems where you rolled and didn't get to choose where the stats went, as it led to people trying all kinds of things they wouldn't normally play
Yeah,, that's the key, the coooperative mindset
 
NautArch
NautArch
7:04 PM
And if someone rolled well when joining - we were psyched! There was no jealousy or accusations of cheating..
 
Alan
Alan
nod It's a basic issue of what mindset are people bringing to the game.
 
NautArch
NautArch
The worst part of that table was a GM vs players mindset. Lots of history about that in this chat :)
 
Alan
Alan
It's kind of why I was head scratching at everyone saying players must hate my balancing system that I posted, when nobody did.
 
NautArch
NautArch
Yeah, I did downvote because I didn't like the idea of it and that was how I'd react to it personally.
 
Alan
Alan
@NautArch nod Perhaps I should have clarified that this isn't a system I would ever have imposed by decree. If I had people at the table who didn't like it, wouldnt' ahve done it
 
NautArch
NautArch
7:08 PM
That's also tough - it can be hard to say no. I said I was okay with a bunch of things my OLD GM did...I wasn't.
 
Alan
Alan
Mmmnh. Well, this was a table of friends who had gamed together a long time so there was a degree of trust there.
I think I may end up at some point self-posing a question that fits the actual situation my solution solved better to present it in full context.
 
NautArch
NautArch
It's really the balancing act I'm strongly against in it. It may work for others, though.
 
Alan
Alan
nod Fortunately, when trying to prove if something can work, n=1 is sufficient :)
 
Play Patrice
Play Patrice
@Alan Before I head off to work - when your thinking about monk grapple builds - Consider not only the grapple - but the monk chassis as well. Boosts to movement speed lets your drag enemies more reliably where you want (And more importantly - you behind your tank) - and since your running that - stealth and the track feat (And decent wisdom) synergize really well for party role utility.
I remember going so fast I was able to make jump checks to pull spiders and bats off cave ceilings - or just jump chasoms to get to the archers. My DM was having fits.
 
Alan
Alan
Nice.
Okay, back to work for me, I gotta get a test ready and then out the door in 30 minutes
 
HighDiceRoller
HighDiceRoller
7:25 PM
@Trish The situation at hand is more like every player in a booster draft opening up a pack and having any player draw the named card. Then you have all the situations that happened but weren't exceptional enough to get posted to StackExchange.
 
Trish
Trish
@HighDiceRoller kinda - everyone was bummed that they didn'T draw the SR card, but nobody knew that the card would even come up
@NautArch I had the 0.0125% chance roll streak happen...
 
NautArch
NautArch
Again, my issue is how you recommend the approach to the discussion. You've started with your 'evidence' that this unlikely, then you ask the player if they've been discarded rolls? That just seems very accusatory.
 
HighDiceRoller
HighDiceRoller
Sure, but even if I had the card in mind going into a tournament, I wouldn't accuse someone of having it up their sleeve just because I encountered it. It's an exceptional event in isolation, but the world gives many legitimate bites at the apple.
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
If we were looking at a 1 in 10,000 result, I would consider the possibility of cheating.
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
8:34 PM
Gonna be honest, I'm really tempted to answer that question with "it wont matter just get on with your game"
 
NautArch
NautArch
@ThomasMarkov At this point, it will matter. The DM has a lack of trust that I don't think they'll let go of, and the other players do as well.
Opportunity was there for DM to nip this in the bud, but instead they acquiesced to the other players rather than explain the situation.
 
KorvinStarmast
KorvinStarmast
@Alan looks like you nailed it
 
Thomas Markov
Thomas Markov
@NautArch That's fair.
 
NautArch
NautArch
But...get on with the game and start having fun.
Weird, a whole bunch of downvotes just showed up on answers to that.
All the upvoted answers.
 
Trish
Trish
8:56 PM
@NautArch yea... and not even had the galls to say anything. like.. about two for each?
 
NautArch
NautArch
@Trish I'm guessing they fully believe it was cheating and want punishment?
who knows.
Darn those people who try and help things work!
 
Trish
Trish
Even math can not proive that the result is impossible?!
 
 
1 hour later…
Alan
Alan
10:10 PM
I mean, Probability never shows anything is impossible. Even if you go to measure space/continuous distributions and and then the probability of any one event showing up is 0, that 0 probability doesn't actually mean impossible :)
<---may have taken a 5000 level mathematical probability course in the distant past, proving things like the law of large numbers using measure theory...sheesh, if I never have to prove that Fubini's applies in a given situation again, I will be quite happy
 
Trish
Trish
Eh... someone had mentioned wanting to invest in Hasbro some weeks ago... I tell yee... "No, it's not getting better, it's getting WORSE!" - ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/…
 
Alan
Alan
10:25 PM
@Trish yeah, other folks thought shorting might be a good idea. Go figure :)
 
Trish
Trish
@Alan perfect time to short for a 4 weeks time would have been right after the leak
 
Alan
Alan
Yep
 
Trish
Trish
11:18 PM
Urg.. How the Heck does anything in this answer (or the other one) actually address the question if the Hecate I modeled is balanced if the one answer is a really bad frame challenge that is 100% inapplicable and the other does not spell out but points to the book that I actually took as reference and then points to a game and not spell out how it's applicable? rpg.stackexchange.com/a/199977/30306
 

« first day (4514 days earlier)      last day (443 days later) »