Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 8928921" data-attributes="member: 58197">Yup, I get the same values.In general, larger numbers of smaller dice will yield more consistent results. (9d4 and 3d6 have roughly the same average duration, but you're far less likely to see your countdown expire on the first round with 9d4.)If you want to ensure an absolute minimum duration, you can put a cap on the number of dice that can be removed from the pool each round.I'd also suggest having dice exit the pool on a roll of 1 rather than 6*. This has no effect on the probabilities, but in most of the scenarios I can imagine for this mechanic, the players are racing the clock; so tick-down on 1 is consistent with &quot;low numbers are bad.&quot; It also means you can use any size die, or even a mix of dice, without having to think about what number you're looking for.*Or 4, or whatever size die you're using.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 8928921, member: 58197"] Yup, I get the same values. In general, larger numbers of smaller dice will yield more consistent results. (9d4 and 3d6 have roughly the same [I]average[/I] duration, but you're far less likely to see your countdown expire on the first round with 9d4.) If you want to ensure an absolute minimum duration, you can put a cap on the number of dice that can be removed from the pool each round. I'd also suggest having dice exit the pool on a roll of 1 rather than 6*. This has no effect on the probabilities, but in most of the scenarios I can imagine for this mechanic, the players are racing the clock; so tick-down on 1 is consistent with "low numbers are bad." It also means you can use any size die, or even a mix of dice, without having to think about what number you're looking for. [SIZE=3]*Or 4, or whatever size die you're using.[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification