Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8314421" data-attributes="member: 18">Um buddy? Did you read the article you wrote?You said:"However, it’s not so simple from a players point of view. Perceptions of agency, risk vs reward, and the gamblers fallacy all combine to make an interesting party debate. They feel a sense of tension about this choice, and as if something good was given them, which I think is generally good for a game. The metagame benefit I get as a DM is that this gives the players something to debate right out of the gate in a new campaign. Which means they start working out how to negotiate as a party immediately."By your own logic, re-rolling 1s infinitely offers the same benefit you're describing for re-rolling ones once, and it has the superior characteristic of getting a closer result.Unless you're thinking that players are going to do a mathematical analysis on on your approach and that's a good thing, which seems, hmmm, unlikely. I think you need to explain what you're "trying to fix" because apparently it's not what you said in the article. Unless you're just trying to trick people into accepting a very slightly inferior (on average) result and are deriving some questionable pleasure from that manipulation. Which I'm guessing isn't the case?</blockquote>