Welcome!

[Akodo Amuro]

You don't ever factor in the emphasis as what the real world results are going to be. All the emphasis does is prevents very low outliers.

82% to hit 20 is about right. You will get a few more upper ended outliers due to rerolled dice that COULD result in a 10. If you look at the upper ended outliers too closely, you're going to roll terribly a LOT. I suggest you use this grid as is, and just trust the emphasis to keep you from getting something absurdly low. You should hit a 15 almost every time, a 20 will be common, but far from guaranteed. 80% to hit 3 times is very very far from guaranteed.

1-(1*.8) = .2
.2-(.2+.8) = .04
.04-(.04-*.8) =..008

24.8% chance you will fail one time in three rolls factoring an 80% success rate.

Note: it is not fail AT LEAST one time. It is simply fail one time.

[Iuchi Xiao Hua]

Could have cast str enhancing spell on someone. Too bad you all climbed overboard before I got the chance. ^^

[Kakita Sugita]

That probability does change some. Down to about 44% due to the emphasis. It isn't a big change obviously. What got me is that I failed the TN15. If I'd gotten at least 15, no big deal. I'd just have to try again. I flew way out on the bell curve.

[Usagi Zenko]

Could have cast str enhancing spell on someone. Too bad you all climbed overboard before I got the chance. ^^

Our ship is not next to the enemy ship. We're not going from our ship to their's, but from land to their ship. Some people swimming up to the enemy's ship first.

[Akodo Amuro]

Yes Emphasis does change the probability because changing the outliers does effect things. Though it should be noted that Emphasis on multiple dice have a strange effect of changing median rolls up by about ~1 ish per die rolled. I'd have to go through my data tables to give exact numbers.

[Kakita Sugita]

Bugger all on my initiative as well. May as well not have techniques

[Hida Musasha]

Yes, but like any gamble, if you press your luck because with luck you will do well, you're going to burn.

Those percentages are always slightly off because they rely on exploding 10's to create absurd outliers to shift the numbers up. You can't shift backwards because of outliers below your minimum number, but you CAN shift forwards because your max is technically infinity.

That's where those percentages are kind of lying to people that base all their decisions on them. Remember that those percentages TOTALLY rely on rolling absurdly high numbers to skew them up. The more you rely on those absurdly high numbers, the more likely you're going to be burned.

6k3 will most often roll between 13 and 17. That doesn't change just because if you roll a few 10's, you can get 57. Yes, because it can, you will more likely roll between 15 and 25, because one 10 pushes that number up. But the average of 28 relies on rolls of the outlier 1 will result in a non-average result more often, which just doesn't happen as often as the percentages suggest. It simply means that when you roll a 1, you will have another chance to get your likely 5, and when you roll a 10, then a 1, you will get another chance to get your likely 15.

[Kakita Sugita]

It isn't 'relying' if it is probability mechanics. It is possible, and that is all that matters. You can say the same thing about luck if you're only talking about flipping a coin. Sometimes, you just aren't lucky. Me... I almost always roll worse than probability suggests. Battletech, for example is a 2d6 system. Average of 7. My average rolls after a logged 58,177 rolls is 5.8. That is piss-poor, as 2d6 is also a bell curve. The probabilities aren't lying, they're just probabilities. You can't rely on probabilities. You can rely on the math.

[Mirumoto Tomoe]

Well said Musasha. Absolutely right. The safest method is still always "only attempt something if you can get traitx5 to hit the TN". So keeping 3? 15 is safe. Keeping 4? 20 is safe. That kind of thing. Anything else is a gamble. Even 7k3 for 15. I'd prefer 5k4

[Akodo Amuro]

No they are not. Those are medians. It doesn't matter statistically if you roll 99999 on a single die roll one in 100000 times. That outlier is brought into the fold due to the calculated nature of the statistics. It just means it doesn't follow a standard curve. And has infinitely decreasing effects of a platykurtic bumbs representing the exploding 10.

In fact with any die roll you have a 10% chance of 1-9, a 0% chance of a 10, a 1% chance of an 11-19, a 0% of a 20, and a .1% chance of a 21-29, etc etc. After 2 explosions the result is mathematically insignifigant. After the first explosion the central or median values given in the first iteration of 1-9 overwhelm any result of an 11+.

What I think you mean to say Muasha is that with a short sample size of rolls 10-30 in an entire online game for instance, that you might not see numbers falling within two deviations of the median, because of what we like to call 'luck' However, basing your thoughts on the statistics is the logical way to go even if sometimes 'luck' doesn't help you.

[Kakita Sugita]

^
|

That

[Iuchi Xiao Hua]

Could have cast str enhancing spell on someone. Too bad you all climbed overboard before I got the chance. ^^

Our ship is not next to the enemy ship. We're not going from our ship to their's, but from land to their ship. Some people swimming up to the enemy's ship first.

Well, I haven't made my post yet. Xiao is there, with decent ghosting instructions.

[Usagi Zenko]

Math determines the average in a *lot* of rolls. It doesn't determine any individual roll. Looking at the odds is only a form of attempting to take control over what is essentially a random occurrence.

Also, taking risks is part of the fun of the game. Sometimes you fail! Sometimes you fail spectacularly!

[Rixy]

All I know is when I 'probability test' with IC it always lies.

ALWAYS.

[Kakita Sugita]

That's not accurate. Math determines the probability. It cannot predict.

[Akodo Amuro]

Right.

And IC does lie. it does it alot. It knows when you really want to roll and when you are playing around.

[Hida Musasha]

Doing mass numbers of rolls with IC, I've found that it falls below the percentages. And we're talking about significant numbers of samples.

[Kakita Sugita]

Right.

And IC does lie. it does it alot. It knows when you really want to roll and when you are playing around.

So true!

Doing mass numbers of rolls with IC, I've found that it falls below the percentages. And we're talking about significant numbers of samples.

I point to my earlier example with 2d6. Unlucky is all I can say.

[Akodo Amuro]

Afterall probability is (as the Usagi said) what allows us to take control of our destiny and make well informed decisions of the outcome. It doesn't mean we will get the outcome we want. It just helps us to decide if we want to risk, and how much

[Iuchi Xiao Hua]

All I know is when I 'probability test' with IC it always lies.

ALWAYS.

Did once a 10.000 roll run on it. It was accurate within acceptable margins. (I wanted to compare it to a program I wrote on matlab)