How to roll d16 in level distribution?
Leonard
into 2 types: bell-shaped distribtuion and level distribution.
By resolving a large number into 2 small multiplicative factors (also
numbers), one can roll dF in level distr. by:
dF --> (dA - 1) x B + dB where F = A x B
e.g.
16 = 4 x 4 = 2 x 8
d16 --> (d4 - 1) x 4 + d4 or (d2 - 1) x 8 + d8 or (d8 - 1) x 2 + d2
15 = 3 x 5
d15 --> (d3 - 1) x 5 + d5 or (d5 - 1) x 3 + d3
To read on, I assume you know a little algebra.
Notice that d15 in level distr. is different from (2d8-1) which is
in bell-shaped distr. In order to distinguish the two, "b" instead
of "d" is used for bell-shaped distr. in the following. Also, there
exist more than one type of bF for one number F, each having a distinct
standard deviation for its bell-shaped distribution. If F is a prime
number while F is not equal to 2, 3, or 5, then dF cannot be obtained,
but bF does exist. Notice that d2 and d3 can be determined by d6 while
d5 can be determined by d10 or d20.
e.g.
b11 --> 2d6-1
b13 --> 3d5-2
b17 --> 2d9-1 while d9 --> 3(d3-1)+d3
In general, if m is a divisor of (F + n), then bF exists; i.e.
if (F + n) = Nm while F, N, m, n are natural numbers, then
bF --> Ndm - n.
Notice that d and b are reserved for functions of dice rolling.
They are not variables. dF or bF means a distribution of random
number from 1 to F.
Since all numbers F can be expressed as F = Nm - n, a suitable
choice of N, m, n (so that dm in level distr. exists) can always
assure that bF exists.
In fact, there are 2 theorems mentioned already.
Enjoy.
L.
Aardy R. DeVarque
> In the 1st ed. DM guide, dice statistics are generally distinguished
> into 2 types: bell-shaped distribtuion and level distribution.
> By resolving a large number into 2 small multiplicative factors (also
> numbers), one can roll dF in level distr. by:
> dF --> (dA - 1) x B + dB where F = A x B
> e.g.
> 16 = 4 x 4 = 2 x 8
> d16 --> (d4 - 1) x 4 + d4 or (d2 - 1) x 8 + d8 or (d8 - 1) x 2 + d2
However, a *much* easier way, which involves a lot less computation, is
to find the next higher die to the number you're trying to get, and
reroll all results between the maximum target humber and the maximum
number on the die you're rolling. In plain English, to get a level
distribution for d16 without a calculator with a RND function, simply
roll d20, rerolling all 17-20. Quick, and requires no mental gymnastics;
a concept which is a plus for a DM who's in enough trouble trying to
figure out how to deal with characters who insist on heading places which
haven't been planned out yet. :) And it can be used for any whole
number, regardless of whether it is prime or doesn't fit into nice
equatoins, or is too large (unless you don't have enough d10's to roll
d1.0x10^365. :) )
On a side note, I remember actually needing to roll d1000 once; don't
remember the circumstances, only that that was the number required for
some event in a AD&D game I was running. Needless to say, I rolled three
10's for the sound effect (experienced players with good ears for dice) and
just picked a good result. ;)
Aardy R. DeVarque
Feudalism: Serf & Turf
John Novak
>However, a *much* easier way, which involves a lot less computation, is
>to find the next higher die to the number you're trying to get, and
>reroll all results between the maximum target humber and the maximum
>number on the die you're rolling. In plain English, to get a level
>distribution for d16 without a calculator with a RND function, simply
>roll d20, rerolling all 17-20. Quick, and requires no mental gymnastics;
Yeah, but the other method was elegant, and doesn't require any
playing around and rerolling. To be honest, though, how many
times (unless you're playing something goofy like *D&D or
EarthDawn) do you need something that isn't either uniformly or
normally distributed?
(Side Peeve: Earthdawn, and their screwy die combinations. D10
+ 2d6? Bah. No game designer should be allowed to specify a
combination of dice until he can sketch the probability
distribution function, without coaching. Maybe then we'd see
systems that make sense. Even my current favorite game, Aria,
has a howling mistake in one of the combat tables, because the
designers either don't know any probability mechanics, or chose
not to apply them to this work.)
>On a side note, I remember actually needing to roll d1000 once; don't
>remember the circumstances, only that that was the number required for
>some event in a AD&D game I was running. Needless to say, I rolled three
>10's for the sound effect (experienced players with good ears for dice) and
>just picked a good result. ;)
It is ironic to note that what you did, with your three d10s
is _exactly_ what the previous poster outlined. You broke up the
desired range into three factors. Those factors just happen to
all be the same, and very conveniently be the base of your
counting system...
--
John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
The Humblest Man on the Net
Michael Jung
[...]
: dF --> (dA - 1) x B + dB where F = A x B
This is is a good method to obtain large numbers.
[...]
: Also, there exist more than one type of bF for one number F, each having
: a distinct standard deviation for its bell-shaped distribution.
There exist also several types of bF having the same standard
deviation but different distributions.
: If F is a prime number while F is not equal to 2, 3, or 5, then dF
: cannot be obtained, but bF does exist. Notice that d2 and d3 can be
: determined by d6 while d5 can be determined by d10 or d20.
You assume, that only d4, d6, d8, d10, d20 (d30) are allowed as
primitive dice.
[...]
: In general, if m is a divisor of (F + n), then bF exists; i.e.
: if (F + n) = Nm while F, N, m, n are natural numbers, then
Let F=7, n=3, N=2, m=5, then
: bF --> Ndm - n.
b7 -/-> 2d5 - 3. The former has range 1-7, the latter (-1)-7.
Even if this is reformulated so that it works, the method proposed by
another poster, which lets you rerolls unfavorable results, is better
for small numbers. For large numbers one can use a combination of it
with the method above.
Although what is "better" and more "elegant" lies in the eye of the
observer, this proposal involves no calculations and (probably) no
more dice rolls. Of course, use reasonable approximation - do not
simulate a d7 by rolling a d1000 and rerolling 8 through 1000.
And who needs a d1357 anyway.
On another matter. To make combat less deadly and less "fumblesome" in
any system, just roll any necessary number twice and average the
results. Even systems using tables and even distribution have the best
and worst results at the ends of the range. It is a nice way to fudge
dice rolls consistently, without changing the original result
drastically, just take the edge of it.
BTW, the paragraphs on bell curves in the DMG (AD&D 1 ed.) always made
me shiver. Are they still there in the latter editions?
Michael
The Amorphous Mass
[number theory snipped]
> BTW, the paragraphs on bell curves in the DMG (AD&D 1 ed.) always made
> me shiver. Are they still there in the latter editions?
>
No. They went the way of ultravision.
___________
Bushido, n.: the ancient art of keeping your | James Robinson
cool when a US President ralphs in your lap. | james-f-...@uiowa.edu
Aardy R. DeVarque
> In <437snc$i...@nsls1.nslsilus.org> jh...@nslsilus.org (Aardy R. DeVarque) writes:
> >However, a *much* easier way, which involves a lot less computation, is
> >to find the next higher die to the number you're trying to get, and
> >reroll all results between the maximum target humber and the maximum
> >number on the die you're rolling. In plain English, to get a level
> >distribution for d16 without a calculator with a RND function, simply
> >roll d20, rerolling all 17-20. Quick, and requires no mental gymnastics;
> Yeah, but the other method was elegant, and doesn't require any
> playing around and rerolling.
Elegant to a math major or an engineer, perhaps. But to us arts &
flowers types who aren't trained to compute fractal iterations in our
heads? K.I.S.S. Anything dealing with decimal places is a no-brainer.
re-rolling is a no-brainer. The more no-brainers you can string
together, the more time you have to decide how to describe the situation
and decide what the baddies are doing.
> >On a side note, I remember actually needing to roll d1000 once; don't
> >remember the circumstances, only that that was the number required for
> >some event in a AD&D game I was running. Needless to say, I rolled three
> >10's for the sound effect (experienced players with good ears for dice) and
> >just picked a good result. ;)
> It is ironic to note that what you did, with your three d10s
> is _exactly_ what the previous poster outlined. You broke up the
> desired range into three factors. Those factors just happen to
> all be the same, and very conveniently be the base of your
> counting system...
d% I can do in my head; d1000 is a simple extension of that concept.
Binary, Hex, or non-10 factors take more work for me (and many
people I know) than the outcome is worth. In any case, if that was what
he was proscribing, why the heck couldn't he just come out and say it? :)
*I* certainly didn't get that out of the original post, though hearing it
coached in those terms does make more sense. A little.
When it comes to d1000 though, I still think just choosing an outcome
that sounds good is better than trying to remember which die you called
as the tens place.
John Novak
>Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
>solution for all natural numbers. Tell me how you will roll d33.
I will, but only if you tell me _why_ you need to roll a d33.
Leonard
>
>However, a *much* easier way, which involves a lot less computation, is
>to find the next higher die to the number you're trying to get, and
>reroll all results between the maximum target humber and the maximum
>number on the die you're rolling. In plain English, to get a level
>distribution for d16 without a calculator with a RND function, simply
>roll d20, rerolling all 17-20. Quick, and requires no mental gymnastics;
Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
solution for all natural numbers. Tell me how you will roll d33.
By the rerolling method, it'll be very slow to do d33.
L.
c533483
eight sider if you roll a one on the two sider the result is 1-8, if you roll
2 the result is 9-16 (just add 8). You can work out a scheme for many, many
such rolls this way. I have used this method for spells tables. I'm not sure
of the statistical accuracy of this M.O., but it has always worked for me.
d30 is important in one game i play regularly, and many players don't own a 30
-sider. Hope i helped.
HEX
Michael Jung
: Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
: solution for all natural numbers. Tell me how you will roll d33.
: By the rerolling method, it'll be very slow to do d33.
You can extend the principle that is used to roll a d3: half a d6 and
drop fractions. In this sense you roll a d100, divide by three. Only a
100 needs to be rerolled.
Since the mentioned procedures are not unique, you generally can
choose one with (a) few dice rolls, (b) little calculation, or (c) which
first comes to mind. On the subject of d21: I first thought of rolling
(d3 - 1) x 7 + d7 = (d6/2 - 1) x 7 + (d8 reroll 8). But if you find
dividing by 4 (twice by 2) not as hard as multiplying and adding
"difficult" numbers (e.g. 7) I recommend (d100 reroll 85-100) / 4.
BTW, you can simulate a d21 with (d100 reroll 22-100) and with
probability 1 your dice rolling will end. On average, though, you will
need to roll 100/21 (approx.)= 5 times.
Michael
Sue and Sean
>Tell me how you will roll d33.
>
>By the rerolling method, it'll be very slow to do d33.
An average of three rolls of d100. If that's "very slow" you either
have a very fast game or a very low dexterity.
--
Susan and Sean (order optional) Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
S & S Enterprises
sa...@netcom.com
John Novak
>> Yeah, but the other method was elegant, and doesn't require any
>> playing around and rerolling.
>Elegant to a math major or an engineer, perhaps.
How did you know...?
>But to us arts &
>flowers types who aren't trained to compute fractal iterations in our
>heads? K.I.S.S. Anything dealing with decimal places is a no-brainer.
>re-rolling is a no-brainer. The more no-brainers you can string
>together, the more time you have to decide how to describe the situation
>and decide what the baddies are doing.
Oh, come on, now.
A little probability theory (or, alternately, a little
statistics) never hurt anyone. It's not _that_ hard. Not for
the little bit that gamers really need to know.
Seriously, in my opinion, any moderately serious gamer should
investigate a little bit of simple probability theory, just so he
knows what's going on, and how the fundamental mechanics of his
hobby actually work.
Among other things, it'll give GMs a bit of an instinctive feel
for how to come up with a reasonable off-the-cuff roll. It'll
tell GMs why 3 or less on a d12 is a lot different than 3 or less
on 2d6. It'll let GMs recognize flawed mechanic systems when
they see them. And it'll let GMs know why d6+8+d10 is an
aberrance of nature...
And for those of us who really know what we're doing, it'll show
how to get really funky die distributions with multiplication and
division of dice. (Quiz-- think of a use for d6divided by d8)
The dice are your _friends_.
One of these days, I'll have to write up a short Gamers' Guide to
Stats and put it up on web...
>d% I can do in my head; d1000 is a simple extension of that concept.
And a d100 is the same thing.
It's just factoring the range into numbers that can be handled by
dice. Hell, you may have even seen this in another place. Have
you ever seen the "Hinge die" concept?
Aria uses it to tell people how to roll a d20 with only d10s.
One die is the one's digit. The other die is the hinge die. If
it is an even number, do nothing. If it is an odd number, add 10
to the other die roll. Same thing-- we've factored 20 into 10
(the first die) and two (the hinge die). We could just as easily
have flipped a coin.
>Binary, Hex, or non-10 factors take more work for me (and many
>people I know) than the outcome is worth. In any case, if that was what
>he was proscribing, why the heck couldn't he just come out and say it? :)
>*I* certainly didn't get that out of the original post, though hearing it
>coached in those terms does make more sense. A little.
Well, I'm currently taking a course most often described as
"Probability for the Engineering Masochist" so I thought it was
perfectly clear. I can try to provide a more comprehensive,
easier to read, but hopefully not condescending article, if you
wish.
>When it comes to d1000 though, I still think just choosing an outcome
>that sounds good is better than trying to remember which die you called
>as the tens place.
Colour code 'em.
Although personally, if you _really_ need a d1000, or anything
more than a d100, I think you're doing something wrong.
Personally, I believe you can do just about everything you'd want
with just 3d6 and 2d10.
Albert E. Gower
If the d6 comes up 1,2,or3 just read the d8. If the d6 shows 4,5,or 6
then read the d8 as d8+8. This generates 1-16 with a uniform distribution.
DMGorgon
(lrm...@whale.st.usm.edu)
Using another station temporarily.
Stephan Zielinski
> hu...@beaver.phys.lsu.edu (Leonard) writes:
>> Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
>
> I will, but only if you tell me _why_ you need to roll a d33.
My half-storm giant elven archer is firing a telephone pole at a mauve
dragon. My GM thinks the table is a misprint, but we're running with
it for the time being.
--
Stephan "Sorry" Zielinski
sonny hays-eberts
szie...@us.oracle.com wrote:
roll a d12, reroll if it's a 12.
roll a d6.
if d6=1,2, take the d12 result (1-11)
if d6=3,4, add 11 to d12 result (1-11 + 11)
if d6=5,6, add 22 to d12 result (1-11 + 22)
or roll d100, discarding scores above 33. there's a slew of ways to roll
dice. it's not rocket science.
--
sonny hays-eberts
ebe...@oregon.uoregon.edu
david_kelman
> The simplest way to roll d16 is to roll both a d6 and a d8 together.
> If the d6 comes up 1,2,or3 just read the d8. If the d6 shows 4,5,or 6
> then read the d8 as d8+8. This generates 1-16 with a uniform
distribution.
The real easy way is to roll a d16. Game Science sells them.
Wayne J. Rasmussen
: >> Yeah, but the other method was elegant, and doesn't require any
: >> playing around and rerolling.
: >Elegant to a math major or an engineer, perhaps.
: How did you know...?
: >But to us arts &
: >flowers types who aren't trained to compute fractal iterations in our
: >heads? K.I.S.S. Anything dealing with decimal places is a no-brainer.
: >re-rolling is a no-brainer. The more no-brainers you can string
: >together, the more time you have to decide how to describe the situation
: >and decide what the baddies are doing.
: Oh, come on, now.
: A little probability theory (or, alternately, a little
: statistics) never hurt anyone. It's not _that_ hard. Not for
: the little bit that gamers really need to know.
: Seriously, in my opinion, any moderately serious gamer should
: investigate a little bit of simple probability theory, just so he
: knows what's going on, and how the fundamental mechanics of his
: hobby actually work.
Or just ask any min/maxer, they should know probability off the top of
their head. Perhaps thats why so many people are jumping in on this
conversation. :)
John Novak
>: Seriously, in my opinion, any moderately serious gamer should
>: investigate a little bit of simple probability theory, just so he
>: knows what's going on, and how the fundamental mechanics of his
>: hobby actually work.
>Or just ask any min/maxer, they should know probability off the top of
>their head. Perhaps thats why so many people are jumping in on this
>conversation. :)
Of course, the only way to keep a min-maxer in line is to
understand what he's doing. Some people do these things
instinctively. Some are trained for it.
to...@sfo.com
> Thus spake hu...@beaver.phys.lsu.edu (Leonard):
> >
>
> An average of three rolls of d100. If that's "very slow" you either
> have a very fast game or a very low dexterity.
Well, I find this method fast: roll d100, divide by 3, round up.
If you roll 00, try again.
Fast enough?
T.O.M.
Larry Smith
In article <43cm6o$j...@inet-nntp-gw-1.us.oracle.com>, szie...@us.oracle.com (Stephan Zielinski) writes:
>John Novak (j...@cegt201.bradley.edu) wrote:
>> hu...@beaver.phys.lsu.edu (Leonard) writes:
>>> Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
>>> solution for all natural numbers. Tell me how you will roll d33.
>>
>> I will, but only if you tell me _why_ you need to roll a d33.
>
>My half-storm giant elven archer is firing a telephone pole at a mauve
>dragon. My GM thinks the table is a misprint, but we're running with
>it for the time being.
Bear in mind that the 33 only applies to telephone poles where
the climbing hooks have been removed. A 1/2-storm giant elf
is at -17 when firing a pole with the climbing hooks still in-
stalled. And your GM is right, it's supposed to be a 37 on
odd days and 39 on even days except in months with an "a" in
their names and the moon is not in Leo. Most people just pick
it up from context. =)
--
Larry Smith - My opinions only. Killfile slac...@aol.com & tau...@ni.net
Government is not reason, it is not eloquence - it is force! Like fire, it is
a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left
to irresponsible action." -- G Washington lar...@zk3.dec.com Unix Systems Grp
John Martin Karakash
|>>: Seriously, in my opinion, any moderately serious gamer should
|>>: investigate a little bit of simple probability theory, just so he
|>>: knows what's going on, and how the fundamental mechanics of his
|>>: hobby actually work.
|>
|>>Or just ask any min/maxer, they should know probability off the top of
|>>their head. Perhaps thats why so many people are jumping in on this
|>>conversation. :)
|>
|>Of course, the only way to keep a min-maxer in line is to
|>understand what he's doing. Some people do these things
|>instinctively. Some are trained for it.
Heh, tell me about it. I narrowly avoided going into statistical
analysis and ended up in computer science. My min-maxing comes the
HARD way! =) (For champions fans out there: a solid dice-rolling
program with ALL the frills can be put on the wimpiest portable
computer or palmtop out there. Much better than a million dice for
your 30 and a half d6 explosion.)
-john-
--
11265-Graham Wills
>>Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
>>solution for all natural numbers. Tell me how you will roll d33.
>I will, but only if you tell me _why_ you need to roll a d33.
A spell is cast which "affects a random person in the given area". There
are 33 people in the area.
I think it's safe to assume by random, the spell means 'uniformly random'
Amusing anecdote. Being attacked by giant centipedes a player suddenly
giggles insanely and rolls percentile dice twice. He turns and
states "I cast break limb successfully and break a random limb. I got
the 23rd leg on the right".
I considered mentioning that centipedes have much fewer than 100 limbs,
but decided (surprise!) that it just wasn't worth it.
-Graham
--
Graham Wills Data Visualization / Software Research (11265)
gwi...@research.att.com AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill, Naperville IL
11265-Graham Wills
>>However, a *much* easier way, which involves a lot less computation, is
>>to find the next higher die to the number you're trying to get, and
>>reroll all results between the maximum target humber and the maximum
>>number on the die you're rolling. In plain English, to get a level
>>distribution for d16 without a calculator with a RND function, simply
>>roll d20, rerolling all 17-20. Quick, and requires no mental gymnastics;
>Yeah, but the other method was elegant, and doesn't require any
>playing around and rerolling. To be honest, though, how many
>times (unless you're playing something goofy like *D&D or
>EarthDawn) do you need something that isn't either uniformly or
>normally distributed?
Elegant, maybe, but it requires an average of 1.2 dice rolls, instead
of your method's 2 dice rolls. A better reason, however, is that it means
you don't have to roll annoying d4s.
George W. Harris
hays-eberts) wrote thusly:
=In article <43cm6o$j...@inet-nntp-gw-1.us.oracle.com>,
=szie...@us.oracle.com wrote:
=> John Novak (j...@cegt201.bradley.edu) wrote:
=> > hu...@beaver.phys.lsu.edu (Leonard) writes:
=> >> Yes. I knew this simple method long ago. But this is not a general
=> >> solution for all natural numbers. Tell me how you will roll d33.
=> >
=roll a d12, reroll if it's a 12.
=roll a d6.
=if d6=1,2, take the d12 result (1-11)
=if d6=3,4, add 11 to d12 result (1-11 + 11)
=if d6=5,6, add 22 to d12 result (1-11 + 22)
=or roll d100, discarding scores above 33. there's a slew of ways to roll
=dice. it's not rocket science.
Easier yet, roll d100; on 1-33, take the roll; on 34-66, take roll minus 33;
on 67-99, take roll minus 66; on 00, reroll.
=--
=sonny hays-eberts
=ebe...@oregon.uoregon.edu
--
1. Keep your hand moving. 2. Lose control. 3. Be specific. 4. Don't think.
George W. Harris gha...@tiac.net
Michael Gilliam
1W> Amusing anecdote. Being attacked by giant centipedes a player suddenly
1W> giggles insanely and rolls percentile dice twice. He turns and
1W> states "I cast break limb successfully and break a random limb. I got
1W> the 23rd leg on the right".
1W> I considered mentioning that centipedes have much fewer than 100 limbs,
1W> but decided (surprise!) that it just wasn't worth it.
We had a thief with a 19 dex. Our DM was fond of having us roll our dex
or less to successfully perform acrobatic actions. During his short
career this thief had occassion to roll versus his dex 6 times; he
failed every single roll, and the last failure resulted in his death.
* SLMR 2.1 * From: michael...@pebble.cts.com
Carl Lundstedt
: 1W>From: gwi...@graceland.att.com (11265-Graham Wills)
: 1W> Amusing anecdote. Being attacked by giant centipedes a player suddenly
: 1W> giggles insanely and rolls percentile dice twice. He turns and
: 1W> states "I cast break limb successfully and break a random limb. I got
: 1W> the 23rd leg on the right".
: 1W> I considered mentioning that centipedes have much fewer than 100 limbs,
: 1W> but decided (surprise!) that it just wasn't worth it.
Once I was playing a wizard (of some little renown) and our party was
fleeing a band of underground baddies (mostly kobolds, gnolls and some
other misc stuff). We came to a bridge (ala Tolkien) and my wizard
says (in his most heroic voice) "I'll Hold them off!" He turns and
whips out a wand and fires a cone of cold down the bridge (exhausting
the wand). At this point I gleefully roll my 6d6 of damage. ALL
ONES!!!! I yelled "Yatzee" and ran for my life!
Carl Lundstedt
UNL
Dana Rourke
variety. His strength is 20 and his THAC0 is around 10 (I haven't played
for awhile) I have the worst rolls with him. I usually only need a 8-12
to hit the enemy but do you think I can actually hit them? Meanwhile, the
kobolds/orcs/goblins etc need an 18 or 19 to hit me and 9 time out of 10
they do.
Dana
Wolgemuth Andrew G
: I currently have a 6 level fighter who is a Bugbear. I have the worst rolls
: with him. I usually only need a 8-12
: to hit the enemy but do you think I can actually hit them?
I can top that! I played a cleric from first up to 6th level,
INCLUDING one case of energy drain in there, I believe, and he never hit
anything. I mean it, NEVER. In a fit of pity, the DM threw in a
magical morning star +3, +5 vs. Vampires (I think), with intelligence and
special purpose powers and God-knows-what all. It didn't help. Just to
make matters even MORE laughable, he almost invariably missed his number
needed to hit by 3 or less, even compensating for the effects of any
pluses he might have at the time. After a while with this character, I
pretty much gave up on fighting, and became very familiar with the
assorted applications of various low-level clerical spells.
A. Wolgemuth (A priest of Tymora with that kind of luck??? Hmmmm.....)
John Edwards
Michael...@pebble.cts.com (Michael Gilliam) once said:
>1W>From: gwi...@graceland.att.com (11265-Graham Wills)
>1W> Amusing anecdote. Being attacked by giant centipedes a player suddenly
>1W> giggles insanely and rolls percentile dice twice. He turns and
>1W> states "I cast break limb successfully and break a random limb. I got
>1W> the 23rd leg on the right".
>1W> I considered mentioning that centipedes have much fewer than 100 limbs,
>1W> but decided (surprise!) that it just wasn't worth it.
I played a High Elven, female Cavalier (ala 1st edition) for a
time with a DM who loved to use critical hit tables (no matter
how bad they were). For three battles in a row, she got the
party into fights, and then promptly died as a result
DM: "You see a party of Drow off to the..."
ME: "She charges, lance lowered. I hit, xx damage"
DM: <rolls> "You are struck twice, one critical." <consults
table> "Head severed."
THE REST OF THE PARTY "Oh great, here we go again".
They decided after having her reserected for the third time,
someone should keep a leash on her..
John
===================================================
= I can picture in my mind a world without war, =
= A world without hate. =
= And I can picture us attacking that world =
= because they'd never expect it. =
= Jack Handey =
===================================================
Travis Hall
Some friends and I were playing in a convention tournament game at Cancon
94. Unbeknownst to most of the group, Lydia (played by Darryl) was
pregnant. My character (whose name I have forgotten at the moment (I feel
so guilty, forgetting my own character's name, even though it was over 18
months ago)) was the only other character in the group who knew (no I
wasn't the father). My character was the servant of the others (a
strong-willed servant - I gave the orders a few times when things got
dangerous and nobody else seemed to want to take charge) and sworn to
protect them. During the adventure, we were attacked by some lions, and
Lydia was injured. Immediately after the combat, the DM rolled percentile
dice, but didn't say what for. I named this the "mystery roll".
At the end of the session (it was a two session game) and that night
(game time) I confronted Lydia with my knowledge of her condition and
ordered her to stay out of combat. Darryl responded (out of character)
"What's your problem? This is a hit point system. I take some damage, I
get healed up."
"Remember the mystery roll?" said I.
"Yeah..."
"Chance of miscarriage."
Darryl turned white. Lydia never again entered melee.
The Wraith
PS My character's name was Jymal (though I'll have to check the spelling".
Deanna Hatter
: I can top that! I played a cleric from first up to 6th level,
: INCLUDING one case of energy drain in there, I believe, and he never hit
: anything. I mean it, NEVER. In a fit of pity, the DM threw in a
: magical morning star +3, +5 vs. Vampires (I think), with intelligence and
: special purpose powers and God-knows-what all. It didn't help. Just to
: make matters even MORE laughable, he almost invariably missed his number
: needed to hit by 3 or less, even compensating for the effects of any
: pluses he might have at the time. After a while with this character, I
: pretty much gave up on fighting, and became very familiar with the
: assorted applications of various low-level clerical spells.
A friend of mine has a bard who almost never hits in combat (only time
she hits (she being character, not player) is with a natural 20). 6th
level bard. She kills more people when she gets creative juggling. 8P
Almost killed my cleric mage when she was juggling with another
bard...missed the juggling check, rolled a nat 20 on the to-hit roll, and
rolled maximum damage...and said cleric-mage was already wounded, and
recuperating...8P
It was funny. 8)
Jason
???
- Matt
Andrew Williams
>says (in his most heroic voice) "I'll Hold them off!" He turns and
>whips out a wand and fires a cone of cold down the bridge (exhausting
>the wand). At this point I gleefully roll my 6d6 of damage. ALL
>ONES!!!! I yelled "Yatzee" and ran for my life!
I remember two unfortunate uses of a wand-of-wonder, one as DM and one
as a player. The first was when the party were down in the tunnels under
the (modified G1) hill giant stronghold - they managed to persuade the
rebel orc slaves to join the battle, and devised the grand plan. They
spent days building a big defensive wall across a tunnel, then sent a
small strike group to antagonise the giants and lead them to the wall,
where they would be trapped and killed by missile fire. All went well
right up to the first round of missile fire, when the mage tried a
wand-of-wonder and disintegrated the defensive wall...
The second time, I was playing a mage, and the party was sneaking up to
ambush a group of orcs at night - we split up and surrounded them. The
trigger for us all to attack would be me doing _something_ with the
wand. The rest of the party waited... waited... and eventually came
searching - to find me 6 inches tall, and stuck on a tree branch...
Andrew Williams,
Physics, Uni of Western Australia.
wo...@utkvx.utk.edu
4a...@qlink.queensu.ca (Wolgemuth Andrew G) writes:
>Dana Rourke (rou...@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:
>: I currently have a 6 level fighter who is a Bugbear. I have the worst rolls
>: with him. I usually only need a 8-12
>: to hit the enemy but do you think I can actually hit them?
>
>INCLUDING one case of energy drain in there, I believe, and he never hit
>anything. I mean it, NEVER. In a fit of pity, the DM threw in a
Wow--I'm glad I'm not the only one with this problem!
In college I ran a halfling thief named Flick, who likewise never ever hit. He
was usually reduced to providing distractions, running around and yelling, that
sort of thing. The rest of the party, sympathetic souls all, and the DM named
him "Flick the Fucking Useless."
Jen
Jennifer C. Worth
University of Tennessee wo...@utkux.utk.edu
Dept. of English http://funnelweb.utcc.utk.edu
KENNETH L. FORSLUND
wild surge. She was a new player so she wondered why we all panicked
whenever she would cast a spell, after all, its not like a wild surge could
possibly happen:)
Ken Forslund
Have a Nice Day(c) 1995 All Rights Reserved
Ken Forslund
http://hp.uwsuper.edu/~kforslun
kfor...@uwsuper.edu
Carl Dershem
: We got a Wild mage in our party who made it to 6th level before she got a
: whenever she would cast a spell, after all, its not like a wild surge could
: possibly happen:)
Could be worse - we have strange rules for wild surges in my campaign
(kind of a thing to keep levels of magic down to a low murmur) that cause
surges whenever too much magic is present in one slamm location - like on
your body, for instance. Our half-ogre got caught in one, and the roll
came out to "hair grows a foot". Well, as Ogres (and half-ogres) are
hairy critters, we interpreted that to mean that *every* hair on his
bosy, including eyebrows, had grown a foot. It was... interesting to
visualize!