Search results

Sure, especially since PF is a year away: How many people will ultimately see PF as a "rehasing [of] 3e," especially since backward compatibility is a priority? Will "GR, Necro and the others" really line-up behind PF, especially those with systems of their own?

Expected winnings = sum( outcome * probability of the outcome). So... Expected winnings for a) = 0 * 0.00 + 20 * 1.00 = 20. Expected winnings for b) = 0 * 0.99 + 2000 * 0.01 = 20.

Maybe it's just way easier said than done? Seriously. There are probably so many different systems because people can't agree on what the alternative to D&D should look like.

:reviews thread: Clearly the OP was a critique of 4E, but YOU first brought mention of another edition. Maybe YOU should take your own advice about toning things down?

This is a good idea if your players are attached to their characters and if you mix it into your campaign at the start (you'll have to fiddle with it a bit). The PCs become "ghosts" (in the sense of Ghostwalk) and can either continue (and even advance) as "ghosts," or retrieve their...

Fixed the link: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=222801&highlight=fixing

Asking interviewees novel statistical questions? I think that's called EVIL. ;) No, seriously, does what have an official name? if you're referring to the d5+1 open-ended rolling, then I don't think so, but I could be wrong....

As malraux indicated above, sigma(i=0 to infinity){1/n^i}=1/(1-1/n) is the special case of the geometric series where a=1 and r=1/n. If you want to start the series at i=1, just subtract off the i=0 term's value from both sides of the given equation. As above, you have a geometric series...

Nothing! In fact, as a professional mathematician, I couldn't agree more. It's just that after working out a solution to Feldspar's question, I was a bit surprised at how much it simplified after such a small change to the problem.

My formula can be rewritten: (n+2)/2 = (n+1)/2 + 1/2, which is what your friend got. More evidence that I didn't screw up....

I took a slightly different approach to the original question and got the same n/2 + n/(n-1) formula. For Nifft's question, when I replace the term that represents the accumulation of 6s with one for 5s, things simplify quite a bit and I get: (n+2)/2, or 4 when n=6. I thought this must be...

Thanks, Cecil, for the intell suggestions -- that's a great idea -- though I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "If you run two parties." Do you mean if I run two separate games with two separate sets of players? I just have one group.... I think you're right that the players would have...

Idea: The campaign is set in an aggressively expanding, oppressive empire in which the use of magic or magic items is strictly controlled and unauthorized use is punished severely. The PCs will start out as low-ranking members of an investigation/enforcement branch of the military. There will...

TS: As I alluded to before, fortunately I don't have to deal with this pessimistic scenario. When one of the other players (all very experienced) runs a game, we don't have problems with munchkinism and I don't expect that all of the sudden it will be a problem for me. Of course, I could be...

By bring in things, do you mean non-core, extra, or both? The goal is to add another layer of choices, in a controlled way, so that players feel "safe" trying out something that is perhaps otherwise mechnically weak but sounds fun/interesting/whatever. If it was just core vs. non-core, then my...

I guess I'm assuming that one can significantly improve any PC by having access to non-core options...so it makes sense to me that there should be some cost associated with taking non-core options, assuming there is a cost to improve PCs by ability score bumps, extra feats, etc. So I decided to...

It really wasn't all that much trouble to come up with this system...I didn't even break a sweat! ;) And I don't see how it limits creativity (since "do whatever you want" isn't an option) or how it could be considered punishment. In fact, I see it as just the opposite: ability score boosts...

Nifft: You're right about the cleric, druid, and wizard, but how 'bout the bard or monk? The focus is more on making it atractive for someone to play something other than...cleric, druid, or wizard. Of course, these classes will rock out even harder, but I'm not trying to level the playing field.

Asurya: Good idea with the spell cost. It makes sense that higher level spells should be worth more than lower level spells. And I've also been thinking that the cost for a non-core feat should be lowered, though 0 or 1 sounds too low.... Regarding the skill points, let me try to rephrase...

Fortunately I don't play with munchkins, so I'm more concerned with getting the prices right within the 1-5 range. I'm certain that the +1 to one ability score is worth 5 and non-core armor/weapons/items are worth 1, but I'm not sure about the rest. What I have seems OK, though I'd be...