Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Coredump" data-source="post: 2636492" data-attributes="member: 6939">You are right. I showed why it does not follow simply adding them, and babomb has been able to use the brute force method to get a more accurate median.The mean *is* going to be 50, that is a done deal. (Took me by surprise...but kind of cool.) The discussion has now moved to the median, which will help answer the other part of your question.Babomb says the (new) median is about 44 (This is a bit higher than I would have guessed, but seems reasonable, and he did do the work.) And the mean is 50.So, in general, you will get half of the wands having 44 or fewer charges, and half having 45 or more.The vast majority of these will end up between 35 and 80. But to give you more detailed info, will take a lot more work. Also, it is kind of irrelevant. The variance is (likely) large enough that you cannot get a much better prediction for only a few wands.I think you have this a bit backwards. I would counsel against raising the median above 50. In fact, the original 20-12-10-8 seems about perfect. It is hard to have a 'very bad' wand experience, but almost all of them will be above 50, and some way above.Not quite. The odds *are* exactly even with the 20-12-10-8 method; that means that the PC's will eventually come out....exactly even. By adding a D6 and D4, that means that the PCs will eventually come out...20% ahead. (60 charges per wand.)20-12-10-8 means that most will be in the 40-50 range, some a little lower, some a lot higher, eventually balancing out to 50.20-12-10-8-6-4 means that most will be in the 50-60 range, some a little lower, some a lot higher, eventually balancing out to 60.The original method makes it a bit of a gamble, but still a very fair gamble. The second method makes it a no-brainer, and the PC's will almost always come out ahead, and on average quite a bit ahead.</blockquote>

Verification