Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4045421" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm honestly having a hard time understanding you.&nbsp; The defined result is from 1 to 6.&nbsp; 'Instant Death' doesn't come up.I'm getting tired of answering these sorts of questions.well-de·fined&nbsp;&nbsp; (wěl'dĭ-fīnd') adj.&nbsp;&nbsp; Having definite and distinct lines or features: a well-defined silhouette. Accurately and unambiguously stated or described: a well-defined argument. 'Probable subset of possible results' means that given the subset of results, the actual result is still ambiguous.&nbsp; The subset of results was neither complete nor accurate.&nbsp; It hense, cannot be 'well-defined'.&nbsp; What definition of 'well-defined' are you using?The only practice I know of that uses 'well-defined' as a term of art is mathimatics, which given your use of the words set and subset I would have assumed you knew.&nbsp; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-defined" target="_blank">Well defined</a> If a function has results that are not known over some space, it is not well defined.&nbsp; The fuction FallingOffOfHorse(x) = Randomly Choose {1,2,3,4,5,6} is well defined.&nbsp; Regardless of the input, I know the range of possible outcomes.&nbsp; A function like FallingOffOfHorse(x) = Randomly Choose {1,2,3,4,5,6} except for undefined values of x, in which case maybe some other stuff like 'Instant Death' is not well-defined.a) Yes, necessarily.&nbsp; All game worlds are provably more simple than the real universe.&nbsp; b) No, not necessarily.&nbsp; I submit I've been playing in those worlds, and they were satisfying.I submit that the primary appeal of tabletop gaming is that computer referees can't pass the turing test.&nbsp; But what the primary appeal of tabletop gaming is doesn't really bear on this discussion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4045421, member: 4937"] I'm honestly having a hard time understanding you. The defined result is from 1 to 6. 'Instant Death' doesn't come up. I'm getting tired of answering these sorts of questions. well-de·fined (wěl'dĭ-fīnd') adj. Having definite and distinct lines or features: a well-defined silhouette. Accurately and unambiguously stated or described: a well-defined argument. 'Probable subset of possible results' means that given the subset of results, the actual result is still ambiguous. The subset of results was neither complete nor accurate. It hense, cannot be 'well-defined'. What definition of 'well-defined' are you using? The only practice I know of that uses 'well-defined' as a term of art is mathimatics, which given your use of the words set and subset I would have assumed you knew. [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-defined]Well defined[/URL] If a function has results that are not known over some space, it is not well defined. The fuction FallingOffOfHorse(x) = Randomly Choose {1,2,3,4,5,6} is well defined. Regardless of the input, I know the range of possible outcomes. A function like FallingOffOfHorse(x) = Randomly Choose {1,2,3,4,5,6} except for undefined values of x, in which case maybe some other stuff like 'Instant Death' is not well-defined. a) Yes, necessarily. All game worlds are provably more simple than the real universe. b) No, not necessarily. I submit I've been playing in those worlds, and they were satisfying. I submit that the primary appeal of tabletop gaming is that computer referees can't pass the turing test. But what the primary appeal of tabletop gaming is doesn't really bear on this discussion. [/QUOTE]

Verification