I believe no one argues that.Agamemnon wrote:Variance according to CP size.
The first issue to come up was that the higher the CP, the higher the variance. Mathematically, that's going to be true and no one is arguing otherwise.
(...)
Thirtythr33 runs the math, because he's better at that sort of thing than I am, and provides us with useful graphs.
(...)
Even at 30CP v 30CP, neither side is liable to open with more than 20 dice at a time. The difference between 5v5 dice and 20v20 dice is only 1.2MoS different in terms of even swing on average.
What we have to carefully consider is that dra's observation is based on the fact that 'Bastards uses exploding dice.
Which means that the correct graph is this:
Thirtythr33's graph does not take explosions into account, hence the differences:
Given the fact that exploding dice are open-ended and not capped in any way (for example every die explodes once) you can achieve an infinite MoS with 1d10. Which adds to freak rolls being viable. More on that below.
I am perfectly aware of the chances for a single d10 to produce a MoS30. I'm just stating the fact that exploding can throw probabilities out of the window, no matter how unlikely.
I believe that ditching exploding dice is a good move because it caps MoS at the number of dice thrown. Yes, you can still roll 15 dice and get MoS15 (0.048828125000% for that by the way). But you can't get MoS30 out of 15d like in 'Bastards (0.000000001211%). Or similarly Mos15 with 5 dice (0.000000258499%).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Depends what we term a "freak occurrence".Agamemnon wrote:The Freakish Roll issue.
The next point raised was something along the lines of "but freakish rolls are possible and get worse as die pool size increases." Again we need to break down what this problem actually means. If the goal is to make it so that freakish rolls simply can't happen, then we can never have a die pool higher than 4, as you can get to DR0 unarmed and MoS5 means I can kill someone in a single blow. If we make it any higher, then we are accepting that the bar isn't "it should be impossible." The bar is "at what point is the likelihood of a freakish roll statistically important enough to worry about?"
I must again stress that the above statement is directly related to an explosive dice environment, and there was mentioned a specific example that happened in play:
Ofc its viable, after all dice explode. Even if I was told it was a MoS30 I'd still might believe it.Two characters both at 25CP. CharA Swings for 21D. CharB Parries for 17D. CharA gets a MoS10.
Let's consider how freakish is this result.
The chance for CharA to get exactly a MoS10 is 1.243%. Which translates in rolling a 100 once on a d100 after a hundred rolls a 100 on a d100 on a SINGLE roll. Unlikely? Of course. Freakish? Not so sure.
Let's turn the tables around.
The chance for CharB to score a MoS10 is 0,052%. Which translates to in rolling a 100 once on a d100 after two thousand rolls roll exactly one 100 on a d100 after 975 rolls, but only because it is a 99.95% chance you will get many more. Now this is getting closer to freakish, isn't it?
Now the strategic part and why player's skill is essential no matter the size of the pool. When CharA dedicated 21 dice into one throw he made a huge gamble. Which paid off because CharB assessed the situation badly. I'll explain.
CharA was left at 4CP with a 21d Swing. The optimal tactic for CharB would be to preempt the attack. He had full 25CP for that.
Assuming that both had a Speed of 3: CharA could get it up to 7 with his remaining CP.
The safest bet would be to Preempt with 17 dice (Sp3+14CP=17d; 25-14=11CP) and declare a 9d Precise Thrust to a vulnerable (unarmored) wheel.
Meaning: 91.5% chance to get MoS1 and preempt on Speed Contest.
99.8% to score a MoS1 with attack.
92.3% to score a MoS3 with attack and choose any location he'd liked.
Alternatively, if his weapon had crap thrust to begin with, he had these options, weapon permitting:
1. 10d Wrap: 99,9% to hit; 95,3% MoS3; 69,9% MoS5; Hit inaccessible wheel
2. 10d Power Swing: 99,9% to hit; 95.3% MoS3; 69,9% MoS5; +1DR
3. 9d Grab*: 99,8% MoS1; 92,3% MoS3; 59,3% MoS5; Grab is Restraining; MoS is Impact; Impact carries over Refresh; meaning he'd start with 25v24 at worst next Phrase, 25v20 (or more) at optimal conditions.
* A note on Grab. The above numbers for 2nd Phrase are correct provided both invested equally in Brawl. If they did not they'd default to something closer to 16v16. With Impact it'd go to 16v15/12/11/... .
In any case way better than Parrying with a 4-dice mismatch.
That's why I said earlier "blame the player for not knowing how to use efficiently his big CP, not size of pools, explosions, lack of caps, or anything else rules-related".
Because out of countless options he took the most disadvantageous one. When his opponent presented his neck on a silver platter.
If dice did not explode, like in 'Scoundrels, then:
- CharA could get MoS10 out of 21d with a 0.438% chance.
- CharB could get a MoS10 out of 17d with a 0.005% chance.
Even I am getting tiresome to everyone here, I have to state it one more time:
All the above are 'Bastards related and explosive d10s play a big part in this. Especially the "freak roll MoS10" thing.
I am sure that 'Scoundrels won't suffer from the same ailments.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If anyone is interested here are three codes to be used here (http://topps.diku.dk/torbenm/troll.msp). The above tables were created with these codes. I'm also throwing in a 'Scoundrels opposed roll code.
Code: Select all
\ Band of Bastards d10 exploding 10s with optional contested
A:=1; \ Number of dice in your pool
\ For a contested action set the following variable B.
\ A negative result means your opponent rolled more successes.
B:=0; \ Number of dice in your opponent's pool
sA:=count 5< A#(accumulate x:=d10 while x=10) ;
sB:=count 5< B#(accumulate x:=d10 while x=10) ;
sA - sB
Code: Select all
\ Band of Bastards Non-Exploding with optional contested
A:=1; \ Number of dice in your pool
\ For a contested action set the following variable B.
\ A negative result means your opponent rolled more successes.
B:=0; \ Number of dice in your opponent's pool
sA:=count 5< A#d10 ;
sB:=count 5< B#d10 ;
sA - sB
Code: Select all
\ Scoundrels D6 with optional Contested
A:=1; \ Number of dice in your pool
\ For a contested action set the following variable B.
\ A negative result means your opponent rolled more successes.
B:=0; \ Number of dice in your opponent's pool
sA:=count 3< A#d6 ;
sB:=count 3< B#d6 ;
sA - sB
Totally on board with this.Agamemnon wrote:On Caps
(...)
Which is more obnoxious and seems less natural? A character with Agility 10, Cunning 10, and Longswords 10... Or a character with Agility 6, Cunning 4, and Longsword 15?
I'd rather see more of the latter than the former.
Agamemnon wrote:On ChallengeI don't follow your use of gamist and narrativist here at all. In fact, it seems like you're using them backwards. His version claims that because in the narrative you are the best swordsmen, you are, in fact, the best swordsmen -- that sounds like a narrative approach. On the other hand, you're arguing that your opposition must mechanically scale with you in order to remain a challenge... I don't see how that's not the gamist position here.dra wrote:It seems you don't quite get gamistic approach concept so let me help you.
(...)
This is why people hate GNS, by the way. No one can agree on what those words actually mean in context half the time.
Totally agree on that one too, no reason to say anything on that matter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And now a bit off-topic.
To make things clear, not only to dra, but to everyone here. I am not an obnoxious kid on an ego trip, suddenly deleting posts I don' like just because I'm a moderator. I was appointed moderator along with thirtythr33 to help Agamemnon and Higgins with the more mundane stuff of forum running, like approving new members/posts and filtering out bots/spammers. Meaning that the team has more time to create the game instead of constantly checking on trivial forum issues.Benedict wrote:I deleted it by mistake, not by some ego trip. I tried to retrieve it but sadly I cannot. I already informed the team about it.dra wrote:Instead you argued that it doesn't happen which obviously I defended. The rest is in post and I regret you deleted that part where your ego got better of you
This is no permanent thing, nor it is my job. If I am asked by the team to step down I will. If I feel I am not needed anymore I'll be the first to say so guys.
At the moment I tried to reply to dra with a quote. By mistake I clicked on edit instead and edited his post. In essence my reply was posted under dra's name when it was too late to remedy. I guess that's what you get when you try to juggle 4 PCs, one laptop, a phone, a broadcasting console, and three persons at the same time. Serves me right.
I tried to revert it back but I don't have the means to do so. That's why I apologized earlier, and that's why I'm explaining now.
When Higgins is back, if he can roll it back, I hope he will.