Goodman Games

jmucchiello wrote:Using two dice as you are completely alters the probabilities. If you are going to use two dice, use them in d% form: d30 = d10 plus (d6 -- 1-2: +0, 3-4: +10, 5-6: +20).

Um, I'm not a statistician, but your solution still involves rolling 2 dice. Doesn't that render the "Statistical Skew" argument moot? Even if your method is more accurate, we're quibbling over a few percentage points: and it's still clunky. At least my way is just simple arithmetic.

I'm hoping the game shop I'm going to next Saturday has a set they are willing to let me borrow so I can do an "as is" beta test. The last time I checked: a set of Zocchi dice was something like 30$+ shipping; & doesn't include a d30.

For my games, I was planing on expanding or truncating the tables as needed to fit the dice conventions.

Tortog wrote:Um, I'm not a statistician, but your solution still involves rolling 2 dice. Doesn't that render the "Statistical Skew" argument moot?

I'd like to get together with you and play a little game called Craps.

I'm not ADDING the results of two dice together. You are. That is the difference. Statistical skew? You are off the chart.

Here's the math: Roll 1d20. The odds of rolling a 1 is 1 in 20 or 5%. Now roll 2d10-1 (the d19) To get a 1, the first die has to be a 1 and second die has to be a 1. A 1 on a d10 is 1 in 10 or 10%. Thus the odds of a 1 on both dice is 10% of 10% or 1%. Are you saying 1% is close to 5%? Okay it is, kind of. Now a roll of 10 on d20 has a 5% change of happening. To roll a 10 on 2d10-1, you need 1 and a 10 (1+10-1=10), or 2 and 9, or 3 and 8, etc. The result of calculating that out is about 21% chance of getting a 10 on 2d10-1. Is 21% close to 5%? Is it as likely as 1%?

Now, my method: roll d10 and d6(low = +0, high = +10). To get a 10 on that you must roll a 10 on the d10 and low on the d6. The change of roll exactly 10 on a d10 is 10%. A result of low is 1, 2 or 3 on a d6, or 50%. 50% of 10% is 5%. Exactly the same a rolling a d20.

This is 3rd and 4th grade math. It's not rocket science.

jmucchiello wrote:

Tortog wrote:Um, I'm not a statistician, but your solution still involves rolling 2 dice. Doesn't that render the "Statistical Skew" argument moot?

I'd like to get together with you and play a little game called Craps.

I'm not ADDING the results of two dice together. You are. That is the difference. Statistical skew? You are off the chart.

Here's the math: Roll 1d20. The odds of rolling a 1 is 1 in 20 or 5%. Now roll 2d10-1 (the d19) To get a 1, the first die has to be a 1 and second die has to be a 1. A 1 on a d10 is 1 in 10 or 10%. Thus the odds of a 1 on both dice is 10% of 10% or 1%. Are you saying 1% is close to 5%? Okay it is, kind of. Now a roll of 10 on d20 has a 5% change of happening. To roll a 10 on 2d10-1, you need 1 and a 10 (1+10-1=10), or 2 and 9, or 3 and 8, etc. The result of calculating that out is about 21% chance of getting a 10 on 2d10-1. Is 21% close to 5%? Is it as likely as 1%?

Now, my method: roll d10 and d6(low = +0, high = +10). To get a 10 on that you must roll a 10 on the d10 and low on the d6. The change of roll exactly 10 on a d10 is 10%. A result of low is 1, 2 or 3 on a d6, or 50%. 50% of 10% is 5%. Exactly the same a rolling a d20.

This is 3rd and 4th grade math. It's not rocket science.

Whoh, peace dude... no need to be so condescending.

why are you using the numbers for a d20? The chances of rolling a 1 on a d30 are .03333333333333333 etc.: or, 3.3% so which ever method gets closest to that should be the most accurate.

You're generating a 1, 5% of the time and I'm generating a 1, 1% of the time... so the math says your method is more accurate. right? So what.

I just was pointing out the fact that rolling 2 dice to emulate a fictional d30 is cumbersome no matter what methodology is employed.

Do you find rolling percentage dice cumbersome? The control die for normal d30 rolls is exactly the same as the 10s die in a d% roll.

Tortog wrote:Um, I'm not a statistician, but your solution still involves rolling 2 dice. Doesn't that render the "Statistical Skew" argument moot?

No it doesn't. His method has the exact same probability of generating a given result as does rolling a die of the given size.

Tortog wrote: You're generating a 1, 5% of the time and I'm generating a 1, 1% of the time... so the math says your method is more accurate. right? So what.

So what? So, the systems in the game you are playing are built around the idea that you are as likely to roll a 1, a 10, a 20 or any other number in between. No one number is more likely to come up than any other. If you have a 1% chance to generate 1 value and 10% chance to another value the system should really take that into consideration.

Tortog wrote: I just was pointing out the fact that rolling 2 dice to emulate a fictional d30 is cumbersome no matter what methodology is employed.

If it is cumbersome either way you go, why in the hell wouldn't you want to do it the right way? The way that gives the same results as using the die you are trying to emulate.

jmucchiello wrote:Do you find rolling percentage dice cumbersome? The control die for normal d30 rolls is exactly the same as the 10s die in a d% roll.

I used a d6 and a d10 in place of a d30 two nights ago. Because I was too lazy to get my dicebag out of the closet.

Worked just fine. No more cumbersome than d%. Less cumbersome than dice pool mechanics, barring Fudge dice.