Doing science on dice superstition

[BreathingMeat]

So I had a particularly bad night with my dice last week. In a typical combat round, my dragonborn fighter would perform an Insightful Strike on an enemy and a Dragon Breath on a cheerful little group of minions - five attack rolls with approximately 60% chance of hitting, costing me two encounter powers, and a net result of zero hits and a lot of laughter from the other players.

My d20s were doing shifts in the freezer all evening as punishment - but to no avail. I carried on rolling 2s and 3s until the end of the session. It was terrible.

So over the next few weeks I'm going to do something about it. I'm going to do SCIENCE about it. Starting tonight, I'm going to apply one dice superstition per week and see which one results in the most success.

Tonight it's going to be the old standby: Store the d20s on the table with their 20s up all the time when they aren't being used, so that they get used to being in that position, and become more comfortable yielding high numbers. I shall publish the results of this method in this thread after tonight's session.

Next week I'll try something else. I'm very happy to take suggestions.

Now I don't want to be branded a cheat, so ideas like "blow on the 1 so that it gets sprayed with condensation and sticks to the table," which might have some actual physical reason to work, will not be considered.

Things I plan to try:

- Storing d20s with 20s up so they get used to being in that position and become more comfortable yielding high numbers Results (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7873229&postcount=61)

- Prepping dice by rolling all my d20s a few times before the session, and then playing with the one which has had all its low numbers "rolled out of it" during prep.

- Rolling a few d20s at the start of the session to see which one plans to co-operate

- Telling the d20s that the one which rolls worst this week will be kept in the freezer for a week.

- Carrying out my threat and putting the one that rolled worst last session in the freezer, and then seeing if the other dice become more co-operative.

- Rubbing the dice on the player who is rolling best to get some of their luck onto my dice.

- Buying a new die that is in the prime of its life and hasn't had all the good rolls rolled out of it.

[Edits]

- Rolling attack and damage dice together, but not from the same "set". This prevents them from becoming elitist.

- Storing dice with 20 down so the dice yield 20s out of curiosity or rebellion.

- Using an ugly die (ugly dice try harder)

- Rolling dice from a cup (because the dice don't like touching me)

- Speaking "lovingly" to the dice

- Writing "I will roll well tonight" on the battle mat

- Actually, I might also try writing "I will roll poorly tonight" on the battle mat and thus challenge the dice to defy me.

- Burning a particularly unlucky die to death and gathering the others around to watch.

- Dropping the dice from between cupped hands (hmm, this one might be a bit cheaty. I'll have to make sure there's a bit of spin on them as they tumble out)

- Storing the dice with some fresh playing cards to make them crazy.

Other suggestions?

[Logalmier]

You should use an online dice roller if this keeps happening. One of your dice may be uneven.

OR

Buy loaded dice.

EDIT: Ohhh, you said you DIDN'T want to be branded as a cheat? Never mind then.

[drengnikrafe]

Do it 3 times. We need replication. If all 3 trials turn out favorable, there would be science to it, in theory. If it's 2/3, try it twice more.
We're looking for statistical significance, which means less than 5% chance it occured by random.

[Myou]

Assuming the methods don't physically affect the dice, what on Earth are you expecting to find? They'll all average out exactly the same.

[Logalmier]

Assuming the methods don't physically affect the dice, what on Earth are you expecting to find? They'll all average out exactly the same.

But, but, SCIENCE!:smallfrown:

[drengnikrafe]

This way, we can prove once and for... now... that dice superstition is (or isn't) real.

[AslanCross]

Dice lose their shape eventually, so their rolls are not guaranteed to be uniformly random.

I do respect your Mythbusters-like attitude, though.

I saw a guy "bribe" his dice with money. :P It worked. Also, microwaving the offending dice and making the others "watch."

[Myou]

But, but, SCIENCE!:smallfrown:

Yes, the science of statistics! Which states that random die rolls will average out over time. And then there's simple logic that tells us that methods that do not affect the die or roll, will not affect the result.

So really all you'd be doing is trying to find patterns in random die rolls. And die rolls don't exhibit any recurrence relation. :smallamused:

[Totally Guy]

This is one benefit of using a dice pool system.

The players don't spontaneously personify the dice because now they all look the same and it can't all be blamed on just one die. As it was always several of them one single traitor cannot be fully blamed.

Whenever we go back to using just one D20 everybody gets silly and irrational.

Edit: Who's up for proving dice pool hive-minds?

[BreathingMeat]

@drengnikrafe: Yeah you are right, but I want to address the issue broadly before I do it deeply - I'll repeat my methods but only when I've tried out lots of different ones. It doesn't matter what order I use to collect my data, and it's more fun to try different things each week :smallbiggrin:

@Myou: You do know what a superstition is, don't you? :smalltongue:

[Draz74]

Assuming the methods don't physically affect the dice, what on Earth are you expecting to find? They'll all average out exactly the same.

No, they probably won't. Not unless his sample size is infinitely large.

Whether any conclusions he might draw are valid bases on which to build expectations of future dice performance is, of course, questionable. But he almost certainly won't get exactly the same averages from various methods.

Edit:

Whenever we go back to using just one D20 everybody gets silly and irrational.

Wait, how is this a disadvantage? :smallbiggrin:

[Myou]

No, they probably won't. Not unless his sample size is infinitely large.

Whether any conclusions he might draw are valid bases on which to build expectations of future dice performance is, of course, questionable. But he almost certainly won't get exactly the same averages from various methods.

Edit:


Wait, how is this a disadvantage? :smallbiggrin:

By average out I mean over extended use. I thought that was obvious.

[Darrin]

This may get you some results a little quicker: buy some epsom salts, and dissolve them in a tub of hot water. This should increase the density of the liquid to the point where your dice will float.

Drop a die in and see which side "rolls" to the surface. If your dice are lopsided, worn on one side, or have hidden air bubbles, then this should show you how biased your dice are. The side that's heaviest will sink towards the bottom, and the side facing up is the side that's more likely to come up than the other sides.

Note: give your dice a good clean wash afterwards, otherwise the dissolved epsom salts will dry and recrystalize on your dice, and this can throw off their balance as well.

[Thursday]

- Storing d20s with 20s up so they get used to being in that position and become more comfortable yielding high numbers



Never! they should always rest in any position except 20 up, so they get curious/rebellious and want to try it out.

'Course, I am convinced my dice hate me, and will want to rebel..

[erikun]

Haha, this is crazy. Seriously, if your dice are actually rolling poorly, it's probably because they are rounded or weighted off-center. You can learn a bit more from YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR2fxoNHIuU), although I don't claim it an expert opinion. (It certainly sounds reasonable, though.)

I have terrible luck with dice myself, either rolling 1-10 or above 15 at random intervals. I have a set of precision dice (sharp-edged) for when I "need" a good, fair roll.

As for superstitions I tend to use (remember, though, that my luck is terrible):

- Store dice together in the same dice bag. This gets the dice familiar with each other, so that they are used to being rolled together.

- Roll dice together as a set. This is more relevant in D&D, where you roll d20 and another die for damage.

- Roll dice from different sets together. This keeps them from becoming elitist.

[BreathingMeat]

By average out I mean over extended use. I thought that was obvious.

Dice don't really get "extended use" during a gaming session. You'd throw a d20 maybe a couple of dozen times at most, depending on what type of character you are? I don't know; I haven't tried counting ... yet.

But anyway, this nebulous thing called "luck" plays a big part in it.

[Gamgee]

Yes, I do have something relevant for this topic.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_bgNRR4ZfVMk/R5fJT9P0CGI/AAAAAAAAAYA/aym7TYeoels/s400/try_science_shirt_300-704938.png

[UglyPanda]

OP, casinos use gyroscopes to see if their dice are rigged. You could probably get the same type of device if you have an engineer friend.

[Logalmier]

Yes, the science of statistics! Which states that random die rolls will average out over time. And then there's simple logic that tells us that methods that do not affect the die or roll, will not affect the result.

So really all you'd be doing is trying to find patterns in random die rolls. And die rolls don't exhibit any recurrence relation. :smallamused:

Blasphemy! :smallmad: Obviously the only way to solve this problem for sure is by the careful application of very very dangerous chemicals!

Eye of newt and frog toes ought to do the trick...

[Godskook]

First of all, there's a problem with your method. Any superstition worth its salt will take at *least* a few weeks to calibrate. Ergo, week-by-week testing will merely keep your dice decalibrated to any superstition.

Second, before you start applying superstitious science to your die rolls, why not try standard science? See if your dice have a bias towards certain numbers by rolling it out a few times.

[BreathingMeat]

This may get you some results a little quicker: buy some epsom salts, and dissolve them in a tub of hot water. This should increase the density of the liquid to the point where your dice will float.

Drop a die in and see which side "rolls" to the surface. If your dice are lopsided, worn on one side, or have hidden air bubbles, then this should show you how biased your dice are. The side that's heaviest will sink towards the bottom, and the side facing up is the side that's more likely to come up than the other sides.

Note: give your dice a good clean wash afterwards, otherwise the dissolved epsom salts will dry and recrystalize on your dice, and this can throw off their balance as well.

But that's not doing science on the superstition! That's doing science on the actual dice physics! What kind of a scientist are you anyway?? :smallwink:

[Myou]

Blasphemy! :smallmad: Obviously the only way to solve this problem for sure is by the careful application of very very dangerous chemicals!

Eye of newt and frog toes ought to do the trick...

And dice whittled out of alkali metals by increasing period number! :D

[BreathingMeat]

First of all, there's a problem with your method. Any superstition worth its salt will take at *least* a few weeks to calibrate. Ergo, week-by-week testing will merely keep your dice decalibrated to any superstition.

Second, before you start applying superstitious science to your die rolls, why not try standard science? See if your dice have a bias towards certain numbers by rolling it out a few times.

Pah! Standard science is for people who are PAID to do it! My way is much more fun.

I'd argue that any superstition worth its salt would have an immediate effect.
Walk under a ladder: BAM. Smacked in the head by a cricket ball from a nearby staduim.
See a black cat: BAM. Sucked into a wormhole and emerge in the ice seas of Phobos.
Treat your dice wrong: BAM. Fail a save and get eaten by a slime.

Now THAT's science.

[Mongoose87]

Most dice are too well-made for it now, but, in the old days, leaving you dice 20 up would cause the plastic to shift towards the 1, making 20s more likely.

[pffh]

Let no one, except for you of course, touch your dice (our GM has this rule for sessions when he wants the baddies to roll well).

I'll post more when I think of them.

[ondonaflash]

Hey! Hey! What is your control!? You can't have science without a control group!

[Swordgleam]

I suggest buying some ugly dice, or bartering away other people's dice which they dislike. Ugly/unloved dice try harder.


This is one benefit of using a dice pool system.

The players don't spontaneously personify the dice because now they all look the same and it can't all be blamed on just one die. As it was always several of them one single traitor cannot be fully blamed.


Nonsense. I have 2d6 in bronze, 4d6 in gold, and 2d6 green with scarabs that I used in a SWd6 game. I would swap out the scarabs whenever a roll was important - they always rolled low.

[Jack_Simth]

Let's see...

The biggie:
Concretely track rolls. Whenever you roll a die, write down which die it was, and the result. Preferably in a spreadsheet or some other electronic manner that will let you do math on them.

Otherwise, you won't have a decent method by which to determine which hypothesis has the most impact on which die.

Other things to try:
Roll out of a cup, rather than out of your hand. Some dice might just not like touching you.

[MickJay]

Try holding the dice in your hands, and speak to them about how you love them, stroke them gently, and ask, in soft voice, if they could please roll high, just for you.

Might work, might not, but be ready with a camera to take photos of people who'll see you doing this. :smallbiggrin:

[drengnikrafe]

Let's see...

The biggie:
Concretely track rolls. Whenever you roll a die, write down which die it was, and the result. Preferably in a spreadsheet or some other electronic manner that will let you do math on them.

Otherwise, you won't have a decent method by which to determine which hypothesis has the most impact on which die.

Other things to try:
Roll out of a cup, rather than out of your hand. Some dice might just not like touching you.

Also, track what they were doing. The dice, that is. Attack rolls, specific skill rolls...
Maybe your dice are fine, but just don't want you to jump.

[Totally Guy]

I suggest buying some ugly dice, or bartering away other people's dice which they dislike. Ugly/unloved dice try harder.



Nonsense. I have 2d6 in bronze, 4d6 in gold, and 2d6 green with scarabs that I used in a SWd6 game. I would swap out the scarabs whenever a roll was important - they always rolled low.

Well if you're trying to become superstitious that's the way to do it.

By the way my own dice for D&D are known as the dice of disappointment. I keep them in a black backed clear case. They look awesome, all sparkly and green. As soon as you take them out of the box and put them anywhere else they're just grey... semitransparent grey... Hence they're the unloved dice of disappointment.

[Ravens_cry]

Also, microwaving the offending dice and making the others "watch."
Hmm, depending on the length of time in the nuker and the plastics glass transition temperature, that may 'work' by softening the material and causing settling, making the dice more likely to roll on that side. If so, I would consider this cheating.

[Godskook]

I'd argue that any superstition worth its salt would have an immediate effect.
Walk under a ladder: BAM. Smacked in the head by a cricket ball from a nearby staduim.
See a black cat: BAM. Sucked into a wormhole and emerge in the ice seas of Phobos.
Treat your dice wrong: BAM. Fail a save and get eaten by a slime.

Now THAT's science.

Nononononono, you're confusing punishments and rewards. Punishments are instantaneous, retroactive, comunative, and enduring. Rewards, however, not only require time before they activate, but also require you to *know* you're doing the ritual *right* before you can claim the reward.


Hmm, depending on the length of time in the nuker and the plastics glass transition temperature, that may 'work' by softening the material and causing settling, making the dice more likely to roll on that side. If so, I would consider this cheating.

Puddles don't roll well.

[unre9istered]

One you could try that worked well for a friend of mine with chronic bad luck. He wrote on the board we use as a battle map "I will roll well tonight." It worked remarkably well, the one fight we had he rolled nothing under a 16.

[Boci]

On a semi-serious note, I have considered attempting to use maths to tilt an online dice roller in my favour. So far I have:

Do not use WoTC's dice roller. The d20 has an average roll of 10 instead of 10.5 since the results tend to cluster towards the center. The exeption ofcourse if for a very important roll that all be a few very low numbers will cause you to pass.

Other internet dice rollers are reptative. I do not have exact figures, but if you roll a natural 1 or a natural 20, the chances of the next roll being exactly the same number are above 1 to 20. This is good for confirming a crit, and makes fumbles even worse. To take advantage of this would require that having rolled a 1 you make the next roll marked "test" to eliminate the heigntened chance of another natural 1 if you are still going to roll for anything esle. If the last roll of your turn is a natural w20, do the same thing to avoid another 20 comming up on a monster's turn.

Anyone else got something?

Disclaimer: I have not used any of these techniques in an actual game and it is best to ask permission before you do. Rocks can hurt.

[Ravens_cry]

Puddles don't roll well.
No, but a slight settling would still adjust the centre of gravity and make the die roll uneven. Someone get some unloved dice, a micrometre, and a microwave to try this.

[avr]

I saw a guy burn a particularly unlucky dice to death in front of the others (he used a cigarette lighter, not any kind of oven). Seemed to work.

[Dimers]

On a semi-serious note ... Other dice are reptative. I do not have exact figures, but if you roll a natural 1 or a natural 20, the chances of the next roll being exactly the same number are above 1 to 20. ... Anyone else got something?

Once I recorded 510 rolls of one particular die to see if there was a pattern for it. It tended to roll 19s, 20s and 2s more than the other numbers. Based on my results for that experiment, I'm sufficiently convinced that my awareness is accurate for trends in my other often-used dice. Sadly, I have a crapsack collection of d6s (the lot of 'em are opposed to high values), and I don't currently play GURPS so I can't take advantage of that trend ...

[BreathingMeat]

Lots of nice ideas coming here. I've added a good few to the OP and will try them out. This is going to take a long time as I only play once a week...

[BreathingMeat]

Puddles don't roll well.

Yeah, I had assumed that Aslan had meant to melt them to liquid in the microwave. I'll file this one under "burn a die to death" and perhaps use something other than the microwave to do it, just so as not to destroy my kitchen appliances. Yes I know this concern for not destroying expensive things disqualifies me from being a proper Mythbuster, but I'm not working with a Hollywood budget here. :smallfrown:



Nononononono, you're confusing punishments and rewards. Punishments are instantaneous, retroactive, comunative, and enduring. Rewards, however, not only require time before they activate, but also require you to *know* you're doing the ritual *right* before you can claim the reward.

Gah!! You're making this science far too hard! You know: I feel pretty well punished when my dice cause my character to miss his enemies or fail to extinguish himself when on fire. Simple science is good science: To that end I shall simply define myself as correct and you as wrong. :smallbiggrin::smallcool:

There. Phew!

[Swooper]

This will never work. The dice don't like being scienced. They will behave perfectly randomly (within margin of error) while being monitored in this way just to mess with you. You can't measure luck scientifically. :smallamused:

[BreathingMeat]

I saw a guy "bribe" his dice with money. :P It worked.

Hmm. This one raises a few questions...

How much money did the guy use? And exactly how did the dice take possession of the money?

[Superglucose]

- Storing d20s with 20s up so they get used to being in that position and become more comfortable yielding high numbers

Technically speaking this has an effect.

You see, there is no such thing as a true solid: everything is slightly liquid in nature. That's why older glass windows are slightly thicker at the bottom. So if you leave your dice sitting on the "1" side, it will get slightly heavier over time which means the dice is more likely to land on the "1", which as most people know, is a natural 20!

(Yes, it has an absolutely infinitesimally small change, yes I recognize it would take close to several hundred years before any effect was noticed. I don't care, it's science.)

[Kaerou]

You wanna watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR2fxoNHIuU

DICE SCIENCE.

Too long didn't watch: your dice are the real problem. They're made with flawed processes.

[Drakevarg]

I don't know why, but there is something extremely amusing about using "science" as a verb.

Anywho, as someone else already mentioned, attempting to scientifically observe those little monsters we call dice will be worthless, as at that point they will roll perfectly at random to mock you. Unless you try to use this to your advantage, in which case they won't.

The dice can smell your fear.

[Ravens_cry]

Technically speaking this has an effect.

You see, there is no such thing as a true solid: everything is slightly liquid in nature. That's why older glass windows are slightly thicker at the bottom. So if you leave your dice sitting on the "1" side, it will get slightly heavier over time which means the dice is more likely to land on the "1", which as most people know, is a natural 20!

(Yes, it has an absolutely infinitesimally small change, yes I recognize it would take close to several hundred years before any effect was noticed. I don't care, it's science.)
Actually no, that's not science. The reason older windows are thicker on the bottom is because. .. drum roll please, they were made that way (http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/does-glass-flow-old-windows.html).

[Swooper]

You see, there is no such thing as a true solid: everything is slightly liquid in nature. That's why older glass windows are slightly thicker at the bottom. So if you leave your dice sitting on the "1" side, it will get slightly heavier over time which means the dice is more likely to land on the "1", which as most people know, is a natural 20!
This is actually an urban myth. The reason old glass windows are thicker at the bottom is much simpler. See, hundreds of years ago they weren't quite as good at making evenly thick panes of glass as they are today. So they put the thick side down for stability.

[Source] (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sciurban.htm)

Edit: Ninjas! They're everywhere! :smallsigh:

[Swordgleam]

I don't know why, but there is something extremely amusing about using "science" as a verb.



http://www.topatoco.com/graphics/00000001/qc-scienceverb.png

[Superglucose]

Actually no, that's not science. The reason older windows are thicker on the bottom is because. .. drum roll please, they were made that way (http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/does-glass-flow-old-windows.html).
W/e, still no perfect solids that maintain their shape and form for eternity.

[Drakevarg]

You wanna watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR2fxoNHIuU

DICE SCIENCE.

Too long didn't watch: your dice are the real problem. They're made with flawed processes.

This was insanely educational. Thank you for giving me a reason to hate my dice that's more rational than paranoid consipircies by inanimate objects.

[Ravens_cry]

W/e, still no perfect solids that maintain their shape and form for eternity.
Eternity is a very long time. I'd hate to be the DM for THAT session.

[Dimers]

Yes I know this concern for not destroying expensive things disqualifies me from being a proper Mythbuster, but I'm not working with a Hollywood budget here.

Pssh. You haven't get mentioned plans to blow anything up, and that alone disqualifies you from Mythbusterhood. :smallamused:


I don't know why, but there is something extremely amusing about using "science" as a verb.

Science is a verb now. (http://www.topatoco.com/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=TO&Product_Code=QC-SCIENCEVERB&Category_Code=QC)

EDIT: And, sadly, so is "ninja". :smallwink:

[Drakevarg]

*insane giggling.*

Actually, I want a T-Shirt that literally says what the ad does.

SCIENCE IS A VERB NOW.
It GLOWS in the DARK.

[Salanmander]

Eternity is a very long time. I'd hate to be the DM for THAT session.

<science>

Raven's Cry has it pretty darn right. First of all, there *are* true solids, and they are *not* partially liquid. Saying that solids have a little bit of an attribute that liquids have a lot of (the ability to settle over time), is not the same as saying all solids are partially liquid. See, there exist materials (let's take ice for example) that are formed by an ordered structure of bonds between atoms or molecules. This is one kind of solid.

Ice is formed when the hydrogen ends of some water molecules bind strongly to the oxygen end of others. Each of these bonds is at a local energetic minimum, i.e. it requires some amount of energy to break the bond. The melting temperature of a material is when the average amount of energy per bond in the material is the same as the energy required to break said bond.

Now, if thermal energy were always spread perfectly evenly throughout the material, anything with this kind of bond would never settle until it reached its melting point. However, it is not. Thermal energy consists of fairly random motion at the atomic level, and therefore can sometimes dislodge these bonds even below the melting temperature of the material. This is what accounts for the settling you were talking about. At any temperature other than 0 Kelvin, any material should (to the best of my knowledge) eventually sag into the most energetically favorable shape. In the case of something sitting on a flat surface in gravity, I would guess it would form a drop, like water does.

Eventually.

The time scale on this is *enormous*. We're not talking about several times the lifetime of a human to notice perceptible change. We're talking several times the lifetime of the human race, at the very very low end.

As far as that die of yours sagging? It's a polymer material, which means it has long thin thin molecules, that are going to end up bonded together all along their length. In the case of dice, these polymers are probably tangled together, as opposed to being strung out in a line (like they might be for extruded plastics and textiles). I would probably place money (if I could) on no perceptible sag happening in your dice in the next hundred billion years. (See http://www.glassnotes.com/WindowPanes.html for more information. Plastics and glasses are fairly similar, in terms of molecule-scale structure.)

</science>

As for dice pool systems, I played exalted for a while. I determined that, when rolling fewer than 8 dice, they want to be rolled by dropping them out from between cupped hands. When rolling more than 8 dice they want to be rolled sideways. As far as I'm concerned, dice pools don't reduce supersition, they just make it harder to form your superstitions by causing there to be combinatorially more things you need to try.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

This reminds me of the time I claimed the dice that came with my Settlers game were biased. Everyone I played with laughed it off as the superstitious whining of a sore loser. Then I recorded the rolls of our next several games, did a chi square goodness of fit test, found the dice had a bad fit within 5%, and basked in sweet vindication. Sometimes I wonder if I should have just kept the biases to myself for some WINdication.

[BreathingMeat]

Well I stored the dice 20s-up last night, and got some MUCH better results than last week - though I'm sure the dice were still trying to sabotage me :smallannoyed:. I'll write them up and publish them later today - you MIGHT be amazed...



As for dice pool systems, I played exalted for a while. I determined that, when rolling fewer than 8 dice, they want to be rolled by dropping them out from between cupped hands. When rolling more than 8 dice they want to be rolled sideways. As far as I'm concerned, dice pools don't reduce supersition, they just make it harder to form your superstitions by causing there to be combinatorially more things you need to try.

I'm rolling the dice one at a time (except when specifically rolling them together to test the luck-enhancing effects of doing so) so I guess that means dropping them from cupped hands. Added to the list.

[AtwasAwamps]

I was a poker player long before I was a gamer. As a result, after a few weeks of playing dice, I cracked open a fresh pack of never used cards, took the jokers out, and slipped them into my dice bag. As a result, my dice have become…interesting.

It’s not that they hate me. They hate my gaming group. With an intense, incredible passion. See, when I’m playing my characters and my friends need me to save them or fight something, I roll low. Pathetically low. My healing would suck, I can’t hit anything, I fumble skill checks, etc. But when I DM? My dice steamroll the opposition. Last night alone, I roll 12 natural 20s as a DM.

I can live with that, honestly. It makes me laugh.

[BreathingMeat]

I was a poker player long before I was a gamer. As a result, after a few weeks of playing dice, I cracked open a fresh pack of never used cards, took the jokers out, and slipped them into my dice bag. As a result, my dice have become…interesting.

It’s not that they hate me. They hate my gaming group. With an intense, incredible passion. See, when I’m playing my characters and my friends need me to save them or fight something, I roll low. Pathetically low. My healing would suck, I can’t hit anything, I fumble skill checks, etc. But when I DM? My dice steamroll the opposition. Last night alone, I roll 12 natural 20s as a DM.

I can live with that, honestly. It makes me laugh.

Sounds interesting. I'll give it a go.

[Heliomance]

Another superstition to try, which one of my friends makes work worryingly well:

Never ever lend your dice to anyone. They'll think you've betrayed them, and will stop rolling as well. Similarly, never use anyone else's dice, or forget your dice for a gaming session, as they'll think you don't like them anymore and will stop rolling as well. If you do forget your dice, go home and get them as soon as you realise.

This guy's dice love him. I have seen him on multiple occasions pull out an insane crit and instagib something that should by all rights have horribly murderated us. One instance of this we calculated the odds of the roll at something like 1 in 8 million. This was at level six, and we'd managed to meet a CR20 random encounter through horrific rolls on the DM's part. It only ever came out when we really needed it to, but when it did, it saved our asses. I'm pretty sure he didn't have loaded dice, hey just love him.

[Greenish]

Try to worship the Lady, and invoke her name every time you're about to roll.




…If we do not hear back from you after that, we'll know what happened.

[BreathingMeat]

Experiment one: Twenties-up

Before we begin, let’s meet our test subjects. Here are the three d20s I play with, each telling us which is their favourite scene from the 1997 Academy Award Winning Best Picture: Titanic.

Red:
http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww167/BreathingMeat/d20%20research/01_red.jpg
“Uh... Boobs scene.”

Blue:
http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww167/BreathingMeat/d20%20research/01_blue.jpg
“Didn’t see it.”

Speckles:
http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww167/BreathingMeat/d20%20research/01_speckles.jpg
“The bit where a guy jumps off the side and hits a propell- ... no wait! Boobs scene.”

Each Thursday night I play in one of two campaigns that my group runs. This Thursday it’s the Shadowfell campaign, in which I am playing a 4th-level shifter druid named Mog. Well, not really. But that's all that the rest of the player characters know, so that's all you're going to know for now...

After last week's dismal performance, I was hopeful that my experiment would yield early success. This week I used all three of my d20s in turn, storing them with their twenties pointing boldly to the heavens when they weren’t in use. The theory is that this will train them to be comfortable in this position, and thus encourage them to yield high numbers, especially twenties.

So I sat down at the gaming table and forced my recalcitrant dice into the 20-up position. Early in the session combat began. My dice were ready to go:

http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww167/BreathingMeat/d20%20research/01_20sUp.jpg
“This feels weird”

I used Red to roll initiative:

Red Initiative 15+8 Neutral (I can't really call an initiative roll a success or a failure, so I'm calling it “Neutral” and it won't count in the success rate)

In the first round of combat I used an encounter power to attack a Duerger:

Blue Cull the Herd v Duerger Wis v will 16+8 Success

I attracted a lot of fire from enemies during that round, and as a result I needed to save against a Duerger Beard Quill poison (FLABBERGASTING SPOILER: They shoot QUILLS from their BEARDS!) to shake a -2 attack penalty and ongoing damage.

Next round I pounced on a Duerger:

Speckles Pounce v Duerger Wis v ref 17+8-2 Success

The dice were rolling really nicely so far! However, here’s where the spite kicked in:

Red Save v poison 1 Failure

Ow. And during the next round Mog received another nasty beard quill, which meant that I needed two successful saves to shake the poison.

Anyway, I pounced successfully on another Duerger:

Blue Pounce v Duerger Wis v ref 15+8-2 Success

Going nicely... But then the saves:

Speckles Save v poison 2 Failure
Red Save v poison 16 Success

Upshot: Still poisoned.

Anyway, I used another encounter power next round:

Blue Call Lightening v Duerger Wis v ref 18+8-2 Success
Speckles Call Lightening v lava hurler Wis v ref 12+8-2 Success

Brilliant.

Red Save v poison 1 Failure

Still poisoned!

Next round:

Blue Flame Seed v Duerger Wis v ref 12+8-2 Success

This attack rolling is pretty good! But...

Speckles Save v poison 4 Failure

STILL! POISONED! When it comes to me not getting killed, the dice just don’t co-operate.

Next round, and now we’re running out of targets. The Duerger are all dead or run away, and we just have a lava hurler to deal with:

Red Thorn Whip Wis v fort 9+8-2 Success

Every attack roll in this combat hit its target!

And now that there’s only one weak, bleeding, pleading enemy left, the d20 I throw to save against that poison effect finally decides to work:

Blue Save v poison 12 Success.

Sigh.

And that was it for the session as far as d20 rolls were concerned. Here are the aggregate figures for storing the dice with their twenties up:

Average d20: 10.71
Success rate: 69.23%

10.71 is above the expected average of 10.5, and you can't really complain at a nearly 70% success rate. However, it was a little disappointing that there weren’t any 20s rolled, despite my efforts to encourage them. Also the dice clearly have some serious hostility towards me, as they refused to cure my character of his debilitating poison until the danger had passed. This has been noted...

Next week we’re not playing D&D on Thursday as half the group is away on holiday, so we won’t be able to test our next method until the week after.