New Dice notation. Do not like.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

1. Inaccurate description is a different thing. But I thought you said that, for example, displaying 10d6 as 10-60 is wrong, which isn't. And having (d6) there would make it 100% accurate imho..

Actually it is wrong in that it is severely misleading. Even putting asside the crooked dice that Eladrin mentioned, 10-60 would make a logic person assume a random number between 10 and 60 was generated with an equal probabilty of any result. That is false if it is 10d6 because statistically 10d6 will cluster around the average of 30, as any dice player will tell you. The result of 10d6 is under a normal distribution curve. This is critical information that is missing.

Now you add to that the crooked die and it becomes even more misleading. because that moves the curve to the right, meaning 10d6, which is really 10d3+30 would have a normal distribution centred the 45 range, with no chance of a 10-39 result.

[Dingdongtudelu]

You can leave the 'almost' out, Lorien . Adding 30 will guarantee no result to be below 31.

[Zenako]

Fire with Fire.

Since virtually no one can recall ever seeing any posts about being confused by the d6 notation on the forums, we can only conclude it was either via exit surveys (which are kinda pointless on a F2P model since there is no longer anything to cancel) or via bug reports or some other method of communication to the powers that be. So ranting and posting here is not the way to be heard by those making final decisions.

If the complaint flow was via the in game request for help methods, then it would be possible to balance that flow with similar requests to ask for clarification about the wrong and/or incorrect info in the new display. If they got 5000 help requests asking what a d6 or a d8 was, time to let them know via that same channe that we are concerned about confusing errors in the game with inaccurate info and supply an opposing set of help requests to get things fixed. It is very easy to blow off the comments of the few hundred of us who routinely post on the forums. From a business standpoint, we are a drop in the (what appears to be growing) bucket. They can also probably rightly infer that most of us are so hooked that we ain't leaving any time soon.

So whenever we see wrong info, report it. Ask for help or clarification. File those requests or tickets. It seems that is the path to getting your way. It is apparently the same path the has ended up trivializing many quests, with no longer locked doors, more shrines, weaker mobs, etc. It is not gratifing to take on a quest that used to present at least some measure of challenge and be able to walk thru it. For some it has almost seemed like you can step into the quest and take a step and hit that big red "I win" button and get quest completion.

[Borror0]

Now you add to that the crooked die and it becomes even more misleading because that moves the curve to the right meaning 10d6, which is really 10d3+30, would have a normal distribution centred at 50, with no chance of a 10-39 result.

Fixed your post; go drink some coffee.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

You can leave the 'almost' out, Lorien . Adding 30 will guarantee no result to be below 31.

/scratches head

See, those ranges had me soooo confused ! lol

/wanders off complaining about morning math

[deathkid127]

they really got to get their act together look at this http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=253935

sorry mid morning tiredness switched link to first page lol

[Dingdongtudelu]

It's okay, Borror0 corrected us both. Guess I should learn to think too, before I write .

[Sarr]

I did not claim that "displaying 10d6 as 10-60 is wrong." However, I did claim that displaying 2d6+1 as 3-13 is misleading and inaccurate. When most people read 3-13, they think of a 1d11+2 distribution, not a 2d6 distribution. The two are not the same and, in some cases, can have very different averages.

It's not "wrong" but it's certainly misleading and not as accurate as it can be.

Well, you assume it on what basis? You can't know what people think. But isn't there real dice shown somewhere? I'm not on Lamannia now, but I had the impression there's some d-something dice shown somewhere? If not, like I said - it should be added.

You don't understand the importance of accurate descriptions?

Look, the description of many spells are wrong. For example, Fireball claims to do 3.5 damage per caster level but, actually, it deals 5 damage per caster level. It's off by 43%! How can you expect players to make educated decisions when the descriptions are so way off.

Well, I even don't see the importance of knowing mechanics as long, as it works.

But in DDO's current reality, where people calculate everything to the extreme, I can see why it looks like a big problem.
More so, I understand that Turbine may have wanted to hide it so they could make less "throws" in the backend in future Updates. Yes, it's a convenient concealment - you think the game makes 15 times d10, but it only makes one throw. And maybe lag problem disappears!
But then, still you'll be able to calculate it from your experience and I know we have many great people here, who would sacrifice their time to do it.

You're either lying to me or to yourself. Otherwise, you would making claims such as "Yes, more complaints about things that doesn't make D&D a D&D." Others will disagree about what makes D&D what it is, to them, and being so assertive about them being wrong means you're expressing more than an opinion: you're claiming that they are factually wrong.

I never lie, you can trust me. I may be wrong sometimes, but only as long as I don't know it and will correct myself when I see a proof I'm wrong.

I just have some psychological/assertiveness knowledge which makes you obviously wrong. What people *may* think isn't as obvious as you say. I'm sure there are people who didn't take it as trying to force you to change your entire way of perceiving D&D. I couldn't do it even if I wanted, right? .

But there are 2 ways of saying "what is DDO" which are causing this confusion. Both are subcjective in the end, but one is more based on facts.

First way:
Emotional. To me D&D is about the great atmosphere and other things I've said. 100% subjective.

Second way:
More based on facts. Do 3e rules make D&D a D&D? Than what logic is calling Ad&d a D&D game? Ad&d had different rules.
This still may be somewhat subjcective, but we could find some things which are the same in all editions. That's what we can safely call "D&D", but then still - emotional "what is D&D to me" will deny all the facts (what "really" D&D is) and we can't have similar opinions if we don't want to change some of ours.

So I wasn't saying "I know better", because that's hopeless. I even think that truth may not exist, because we can't know anything for sure . We need to base many things on beliefs - we even need to believe we're living and not dreaming, because we can't know it for sure.

I always say my opinion because I believe there's only our opinion, we know nothing else. That my philosophy.

****, I really tried not to touch philosophy here . But I really said only my own opinion. I even didn't try to manipulate anything. That's logical and clear if you'd delve deeper into it Borror0, and as guess you want to get everything precise - I really encourage you to delve into psychology : ). That's like mathematics, really, but then at some point even mathematics start to seem arguable ^^. But that's reality, we know nothing for sure (or I am wrong, and I know I can be, always).

[Auran82]

The thing that bugs me about all this is that while 2D6 technically gives the range of 2-12, the simple fact is that it's not an even distribution. Tell people 2-12 without explaining this, and *some* people, will wonder why they don't see alot of 2s or 12s but lots of numbers around 7 or 8. Some might pass it off as luck, some will understand, others will just think the numbers are skewed or just incorrect.

When you involve spells it gets even worse, especially if 1D6 is actually 1D3+3 or something similar. While more explanation of how the final numbers are reached (My Maxamised Empowered 10D6 fireball did how much exactly? What?) removing the dice description I don't think will help. Especially if 1D6 is not actually 1-6 and is actually 4-6.

[HallowedOne]

Well, you assume it on what basis? You can't know what people think. But isn't there real dice shown somewhere? I'm not on Lamannia now, but I had the impression there's some d-something dice shown somewhere? If not, like I said - it should be added.

http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p...&postcount=188

This is why 10d6 is NOT the same as 10 to 60. It is INNACURATE.

Thats the difference between a Greataxe(1d12/ 20 x3) and a Greatsword (2d6 / 19-20 x2). A greatsword will put a more reliable damage over time, while a Greataxe has a higher chance of severing an enemy's head in 1 blow.

Edit: typo

[Borror0]

Well, you assume it on what basis? You can't know what people think.

People won't magically guess that the distribution is more complicated than how it's described as, when nothing suggests it is.

But isn't there real dice shown somewhere? I'm not on Lamannia now, but I had the impression there's some d-something dice shown somewhere? If not, like I said - it should be added.

The problem with that logic is that it's self-refuting. If you do concede the fact that merely writing the range is misleading because it does not accurately portray the distribution of values yet still assume that the XdY distribution is confusing to new players, then you cannot say that displaying XdY on the description solves the problem as, according to your own position, new players can't guess what XdY means.

And to answer your question, no, it's missing on several descriptions.

More so, I understand that Turbine may have wanted to hide it so they could make less "throws" in the backend in future Updates.

It makes as many throws. not more. Not less. Just as many.

I wasn't saying "I know better"

You did. You are simply unaware of it.

I really encourage you to delve into psychology

Oh my, the irony of this statement...

[Sarr]

Actually it is wrong in that it is severely misleading. Even putting asside the crooked dice that Eladrin mentioned, 10-60 would make a logic person assume a random number between 10 and 60 was generated with an equal probabilty of any result. That is false if it is 10d6 because statistically 10d6 will cluster around the average of 30, as any dice player will tell you. The result of 10d6 is under a normal distribution curve. This is critical information that is missing.

Now you add to that the crooked die and it becomes even more misleading. because that moves the curve to the right, meaning 10d6, which is really 10d3+30 would have a normal distribution centred the 45 range, with no chance of a 10-39 result.

No, with all respect, but you're wrong . It would not make a really logic person assume it. A logic person would doubt how really it is calculated, because 10-60 just informs us about damage range. Not about the method used to generate that 10-60, so there's no misleading.
It's just a "mental shortcut" when one assumes it's generated as random 10-60 number take from one "throw". It can even mean 2000 pointless throws and other scientific calculations generated by some computer. It may even mean (100 + 10-to-60 roll) - (100 x 10) / 10. If I didn't make a mistake in calculation here .
And still, that's not misleading, it just means we don't know what happens behind that damage range.
You see it now, right?

Another thing is that you may want to know exactly how mechanics work. But we may accuse Turbine of misleading when they write 1d6 and it means 2d3. Damage range isn't misleading, it's just concealing the mechanics.

But lets understand that writing 2d3 would be even more complex for people who don't know D&D. That's really a barrier for them...

So maybe let's ask Turbine straight - do you want to mislead us for some reason, or not? But heheh, we won't know if the answer is honest, so this discussion will NEVER end .

Unless they really write it in descriptions and make DDO very hard to understand for some people... or unless they'll do it elsewhere. Maybe they should write real mechanics in Compendium and keep DDO accessible?

I really can't tell what's best option to satisfy both camps. That's hard, but lets not forget those newbies, which probably aren't even here to write what they think...

[Borror0]

Damage range isn't misleading, it's just concealing the mechanics.

I won't reply to your posts any longer. At best, you're debating semantics and it's a waste of time.

The fact of the matter is that this change won't lead to description which will inform players as much as they ought to. Period.

I really can't tell what's best option to satisfy both camps.

Here's a suggestion to you: read the thread. You'll find at least two, if not more, that have the potential to do so.

[Dingdongtudelu]

Sarr, you have stated your opinion, along with 2d100 people doing so. We appreciate your input, thanks!

[Sarr]

You did. You are simply unaware of it.

Oh my, the irony of this statement...

Nope Borror0 . And I won't repeat it over and over, because you're not able to understand it. Go and learn it first, ok?

What you say is only based on your assumptions. If I added "imho" to that part, you wouldn't be able to say I try say "I know better" in that post, right?

And now realize I didn't write "imho" because I think that's obvious that I speak only my own opinion. To be honest, I write "imho" because people who think like you accuse me just like you do... And you're wrong. I know what I thought writing it, not you Borror0. You assumed wrong and fell into your own trap. I didn't write I am objective (as I can't be), so once again...

Please assume all people write are their own opinions! If I said "d6 is really d20 in DDO. I know it for sure!" (obviously wrong statement), then you can point me to see the source once again . Other kinds of things are just opinions... Especially "what is DDO".

Is there a research where it's proven what really is D&D? No. No one can't prove it, so please don't teach me that it's only my opinion. It's more than obvious to me, to the point I don't even like to write it again and again and again...

I won't reply to your posts any longer. At best, you're debating semantics and it's a waste of time.

The fact of the matter is that this change won't lead to description which will inform players as much as they ought to. Period.

Here's a suggestion to you: read the thread. You'll find at least two, if not more, that have the potential to do so.

Semantics ARE mathematically logical Borror0. That's what lawyers base on. All respect, but EOT from me, you can learn it elsewhere.

[Zenako]

When we roll 2d6, we roll 2d6, not 1d11+1.

Except for spells, where we tend to roll skewed things like 2d3+6.

This should be easily proven by whacking something with a greatsword and logging your damage per swing.

hmmm what spell is supposed to be doing a d12 of damage vs the 2d3+6 cited above?

We KNOW that the healing spells are skewed. We also know that some other spells are skewed. Its just that with items, feats and enhancements so few casters ever toss an unbuffed spell that it would be hard to notice unless you track things carefully.

Of course Eladrin could have just been making up the notation for examples sake..

[Truga]

Disclaimer: elementary math examples ahead. I have no intention in showing mathematically why exactly this happens.
Also blatant ignoring of enhancements/feats and other similar buffs/gear for determining actual DDO damage.

When we roll 2d6, we roll 2d6, not 1d11+1.

Except for spells, where we tend to roll skewed things like 2d3+6.

This should be easily proven by whacking something with a greatsword and logging your damage per swing.

This is the problem though. Let me demonstrate:

Delayed blast fireball at level 20 does 20d6 damage, which under the new notation will show up as 20-120 damage.

Now, since 20d6 is technically 20-120, one would expect a random range of numbers anywhere between 20 and 120, at a first glance. Is this really the case though?

To make this easier to understand, I will use Lina. She's an IRC bot that throws dies for lazy people like me:

Lina> Truga, (20d6) 80; (20d6) 79; (20d6) 70; (20d6) 71; (20d6) 81; (20d6) 76; (20d6) 70; (20d6) 62; (20d6) 74; (20d6) 80.
Lina> Truga, (20d6) 78; (20d6) 64; (20d6) 65; (20d6) 78; (20d6) 69; (20d6) 68; (20d6) 52; (20d6) 74; (20d6) 71; (20d6) 80.

Oops? Most of the numbers I see are between 60 and 80 with only 2 out of the 20 rolls outside that range. One might say my bot is just dumb, but if you repeat this test with your d6s, you'll get similar results.

The average roll on a d6 is 3.5. That means, if you roll the die a large number of times, add the numbers up and divide by number of rolls you'll get a number that roughly resembles 3.5. Now 20 isn't really a "large number" but it is large enough for the evil branch of math, statistics, to kick in.

Now since the average is 3.5 and delayed fireball is 20 times that, the damage will be roughly 70. Testing this showed success above, with 90% rolls ending up between 60 and 80, and only one roll being more than 20% away from this average.

Now, we said 20d6 is 20-120. However, looking a little bit further quickly showed that 95% rolls end up with less than 20% deviation from the average of 70. This means:
When I throw a fireball, I know I will do somewhere between 56 and 84 damage, with 95% certainty. This makes the fireball look like a much more reliable spell, than the plain 20-120 number. Yes, I might roll a 20, or I might even roll a 120. However, if I manage to do that, I think I'll quit playing DDO and start playing Lotto. (Chances of throwing either a 20, or a 120 are roughly 1 in 3656000000000000, or shorter 3.656e+15)

Also, since spell damages are actually skewed, the 20-120 is even further from the truth...

Edit: I suggest an option in the future, that will switch between the 2 notations? Pick what you prefer etc..

Edit2: lotka.org (this is an inside joke, you can ignore it if you don't know what it means)

[William_the_Bat]

With this thread approaching 500 posts, I have to wonder if they've gotten the message that an approach that keeps the dice (and the DnD feel) would be preferable?

To me, it's not so much about the bell curve (though that's important) but the flavor of DnD.

[carlosjuero]

With this thread approaching 500 posts, I have to wonder if they've gotten the message that an approach that keeps the dice (and the DnD feel) would be preferable?

To me, it's not so much about the bell curve (though that's important) but the flavor of DnD.

Even if they have gotten the message, they aren't going to [be able to] change it for U5 release

[JPDefault]

Of course someone can say what D&D is or isn't: since it's an Intellectual Property, it has a propietor, which is WoTC.
They made a game and called it "D&D 3.5ed". It has rules, it uses dice and so on.
They have rights to tell what is D&D and what is not.

I don't think you can claim another product is "based on D&D 3.5ed" if for example it has no dice rolls, enemies are aliens and there's only one playing character called Duke who kills the aliens using shotguns...