Design and Development: Monsters
You know, I read something in this article that did not make sense to me. Let me throw in a couple of quotes to show you what I am talking about.
So, here is what baffles me. Where did Peter (or Jonathan Tweet for that matter) come up with the 25%, 33%, 50%, and 100% numbers? A roll of 1d4 is pretty straightforward mathematically. There's a 25% chance of rolling a 1. There is a 50% chance of rolling a 1 or a 2. There's a 75% chance of rolling a 1, 2, or 3. There's a 100% chance of rolling a 1, 2, 3, or 4. Am I missing something here?
I know it's been years since I took any probability classes, but I thought this one was fairly simple.
Rob Heinsoo said:
Okay, so let me see if I am remembering my probability data correctly, because what they said there has me confused. The chance of rolling any number of a 4-sided die is 25%. The chance for each roll of the die is the same, not dependent on previous rolls. So the first time you roll the die there is a 25% chance to get any number, and the second time there's a 25% chance, and so on. Right so far?Peter Schaefer said:
So, here is what baffles me. Where did Peter (or Jonathan Tweet for that matter) come up with the 25%, 33%, 50%, and 100% numbers? A roll of 1d4 is pretty straightforward mathematically. There's a 25% chance of rolling a 1. There is a 50% chance of rolling a 1 or a 2. There's a 75% chance of rolling a 1, 2, or 3. There's a 100% chance of rolling a 1, 2, 3, or 4. Am I missing something here?
I know it's been years since I took any probability classes, but I thought this one was fairly simple.
Hussar
Legend
Well, as someone who didn't buy that book, I liked the article.
Yay me, I saved some cash.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
Don't know, it wasn't a rehash of "World & Monsters", and I didn't find it bad, even if it didn't contain much new information for me...
Eh. I was just expecting something that it wasn't, so it was a major disappointment for me.
arscott
First Post
That's how the recharge mechanic works in 4e (albeit with a d6 instead). But a Dragon's breath weapon in 3e could be used again in 1d4 rounds--That is, roll a d4, and it's available that many rounds later. Thus the 25-33-50-100 thing. Using that system, a dragon's chance of breathing on any given round (assuming it breathes whenever it can) hovers around 40%.
Jack99
Adventurer
While I wouldn't call it major, I agree. The article certainly wasn't what I had expected, and thus a disappointment.
wedgeski
Adventurer
That's an odd point of view, don't you think? Can it not be good in its own right?
Keefe the Thief
Adventurer
No. "Be disappointed based on your own expectations" is ENworlds new motto since 4e launched. It seems.
I know that statistics can produce some pretty strange results, but I still don't get where 25-33-50-100 comes from.
When the question is "how high is the chance that the breath weapon recharges at this round", then the chance is 25% each round as there is a 25% chance for any result on a d4 (recharge after 1 round? 25%, recharge after 2 rounds? 25% And so on).
When the question is "How high is the chance that the breath weapon has recharged by now?" you get a 25-50-75-100 result.
Maybe the real question was "How high is the chance that the breath weapon is usable this turn?" (although I don't read it that way) which figures in the chance of "If the breath weapon recharged on turn 1, how high is the chance that the dragon can breath on turn 2" and I am too lazy to calculate that. But I don't think that this is the correct question because then the 100% chance on the 4th round wouldn't make sense as it is possible that the dragon can not breath on turn 4 (for example when it breathed on round 3 and rolled a 2).
