Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Monte Carlo versus "The Math"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4987719" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>Actually, I think fairly serious levels of complexity can be modeled and they can give people a real good idea of how the math really works.</p><p></p><p>The problem is coming up with the time to do that. It's a major effort to program things such as each PC's actions being a choice based on weighing factors. For example, choice on which foe(s) to target, choice on which power to use (with factors for not using Daily powers or Daily item powers unless the gain seems significant), choice on which square to move to, choice on which PC to heal, etc. All of these could be given weights and a system could be devised. It wouldn't be perfect, but it could be done.</p><p></p><p>People do this with things such as chess programs all of the time. But, they take a long time to develop.</p><p></p><p>With regard to different builds, a developer could create 3 different builds for each class (54 PCs? all the way to level 30), then create all of the possible combinations of (for example) two strikers, one defender, one leader, and one controller. But, this would multiply the number of runs by ~250,000 for any given scenario test, so it would take some serious computing power. The number climbs real quick, but a reasonable simulation could be done. It's just hard and time consuming to do.</p><p></p><p>No simulation will handle everything, but such a simulation at certain levels will indicate things such as how many rounds it took for the various "teams" to either succeed or die.</p><p></p><p>Tests could even be run with other factors. One random Daily power used and 20% healing surges gone for each PC, two random Daily powers used and 40% healing surges gone for each PC, etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 4987719, member: 2011"] Actually, I think fairly serious levels of complexity can be modeled and they can give people a real good idea of how the math really works. The problem is coming up with the time to do that. It's a major effort to program things such as each PC's actions being a choice based on weighing factors. For example, choice on which foe(s) to target, choice on which power to use (with factors for not using Daily powers or Daily item powers unless the gain seems significant), choice on which square to move to, choice on which PC to heal, etc. All of these could be given weights and a system could be devised. It wouldn't be perfect, but it could be done. People do this with things such as chess programs all of the time. But, they take a long time to develop. With regard to different builds, a developer could create 3 different builds for each class (54 PCs? all the way to level 30), then create all of the possible combinations of (for example) two strikers, one defender, one leader, and one controller. But, this would multiply the number of runs by ~250,000 for any given scenario test, so it would take some serious computing power. The number climbs real quick, but a reasonable simulation could be done. It's just hard and time consuming to do. No simulation will handle everything, but such a simulation at certain levels will indicate things such as how many rounds it took for the various "teams" to either succeed or die. Tests could even be run with other factors. One random Daily power used and 20% healing surges gone for each PC, two random Daily powers used and 40% healing surges gone for each PC, etc. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Monte Carlo versus "The Math"
Top