• Archpawn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    35 minutes ago

    The funny thing is that this logic assumes the rolls are independent (so you can just multiply probabilities), but the definition of independence is that past rolls can’t affect future ones. So basically it’s saying that past rolls can’t affect future ones and therefore they must.

  • sbv@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 hours ago

    The trick is to say “this is just a practice roll” where the die can hear you, but wink at the GM so they know it’s the real roll. That way, the die will be a spiteful little punk and throw out the nat20 for the “practice”.

    But don’t do that too often, or the die will figure out the trick.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It literally doesn’t matter whether you stick with your door or switch.

      Takes mathematical model and shoves it in the trash

      No! I won’t listen! It doesn’t matter, I tell you!!!

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Man there’s something about the monty hall problem that just messes with human reasoning. I get it now and it’s really not even complicated at all but when you first learn about it you tend to overthink it. Now I don’t even understand how I was ever confused.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I think the problem is that people forget Monty Hall has information that the contestant does not. The naive assumption is that he’s just picking a door and you’re just picking a door. The unsophisticated viewer never really stops to think about why Monty Hall never points to a door and reveals a prize by mistake.

          One way I’ve had success explaining it is to expand the problem to more than three doors. Assume 100 doors. Monty Hall then says “Open 98 doors” and fails to reveal a prize behind any of them. Now its a bit more clear that he knows something you don’t.

          • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            54 minutes ago

            Maybe? I don’t think that was my issue. I think I was overthinking it and using the second “choice” as an event with separate odds.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              44 minutes ago

              The thing you’re getting by switching is the benefit of the information provided by the person who revealed an empty door.

              Before a door is open, you have a 1/3 chance of selecting correctly.

              After you select a door, the host picks from the other two doors. This provides extra information you didn’t have during your initial selection. The host points to a door they know is a dud and asks for it to open. So now you’re left with the question “Did I pick the correct door on the first go? Or did the host skip the door that had the prize?” There’s a 1/3 chance you picked the right door initially and a 2/3 chance the host had to avoid the prize-door.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Imagine if he didn’t always show the other zonk. “So you picked door number 1. Let’s see what’s behind door number 2!”

      Door 2 reveals a brand new car

      “… So, do you wanna switch to door 3?”

  • BLAMM67@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    6 hours ago

    This kind of thinking is wasteful. Every d20 has a finite lifespan. It was created, and it will, at some time in the future be destroyed, as all things are. That means it has a finite number of rolls in its lifetime, with an equal distribution of all possible outcomes. When you “practice roll” and get a nat 20, you have wasted one of the limited number of nat 20s that die has in it. Think of the 20s. Don’t practice roll.

    • moseschrute@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      35 minutes ago

      That’s stupid. But obviously how the dice strikes the table impacts its balance and therefore the probability of rolling specific numbers. So we must figure out what side need to strike the table first to decrease the probability of getting an undesirable roll. Boom, I out physicsed you’re probabilities.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      🎶These dice are spinning around me

      🎶The whole table’s spinning without me

      🎶Every sesh sends future to past

      🎶Every roll leaves me one less to my last

    • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      On the contrary, it will not be the number of rolls that destroys it, but being thrown away. You should roll it as much as you can before then, any time spent not rolling is time wasted!

      • Archpawn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        38 minutes ago

        Where did they get an AI that managed to mess up “roll” as “role” twice in the same page? Humans do it because they sound the same, but AI doesn’t know how they sound. The AI knows that sometimes people say “role” instead of “roll”, but they’re generally set to raise the probability of a token to some power, and since most people spell “roll” right, they’re even more likely to. And they also generally have a post-training step where they’re trained to spell stuff right and that sort of thing. And they don’t even need to be trained on that specifically, since some people spell better than others, so they can understand the general concept of good vs bad spelling.

  • yermaw@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Thats the same argument to use taking a bomb on a plane. What are the odds of having 2 bombs on board?

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The die need to warm up. I have to practice my release to make sure of a good number. Don’t take this from me.

  • brian@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Ok. I know that this isn’t correct… But isn’t it?

    If you’re having an unlimited number of rolls prior to your “real” roll, then you would be, in essence, creating a situation that has a statistically lower chance of happening.

    • psycotica0@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Short version, two coin flips. There are 4 options:

      HH, HT, TH, TT

      So there’s two chances to get one Tails and one Heads, out of 4, so 2/4 = 1/2, half the tosses. Then 1/4 on each of HH and TT.

      So rolling one Tails is more likely than rolling two.

      But once you’ve flipped the first coin, it’s “locked in”. If it was Heads, the only options left to you are HT and HH. The fact that there could have been a T that, if flipped first, would land us in TH is irrelevant fantasy. We’ve got the H, and all that’s left is HT or HH, even odds.

      Dice are the same. What makes a double 1 rare is that you have to roll 1 specifically and only two times to get there, whereas a single 1 can be first or second, and the other number can be any of the other 19 other numbers. It’s the duplication of different results we consider “the same” that make one thing more likely. But once you’ve already rolled a 1, none of that matters anymore. Now it’s just 20 numbers, each equally likely. We’re locked in.

    • JakenVeina@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The standard answer is that the odds of the first roll don’t change the odds of the second roll, the second roll still has a 1/20 chance of a 1, no matter what the first roll is.

      The more thorough answer is that it’s a misunderstanding of what probabilities are. Yes, there’s a 1/400 chance of rolling 2 1s, but by the time you roll the first die and get a 1, you’re not talking about that problem anymore. You’ve introduced new information to the problem, and thus have to change your calculation. There’s a 1/20 chance of rolling 2 1s after you’re already rolled one. Let’s calculate it…

      So, there’s 400 ways 2 dice can fall, yes, and there’s only 1 way that they can both fall on 1. However, there’s 20 ways that the first die can fall on 1, one for each possible fall of the second die. So, when we say that that has already happened, we have to eliminate 380 of those 400 die rolls, those are no longer possible. That leaves us with only 20 ways that the second die can fall, and only 1 of those is a 1. So the odds of rolling a on the second die, after already rolling a 1 on the first die is 1/20.

      We can also calculate it differently. What are the odds of the second die falling on 1? Cause that’s the one we care about, really. And there’s 20 ways that can happen, one for each possible fall of the first die. So the odds of the second die falling on 1, when rolling 2 dice is 20/400, or 1/20.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      If you’re having an unlimited number of rolls prior to your “real” roll

      You’d end up with a perfectly smooth D20 which would never stop rolling, assuming it was rolled in a vacuum.

    • FearfulSalad@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Before you roll any dice, the chances of rolling two nat 1s are 1/400. But after you roll your first die, whatever it happened to be, your chances of rolling a nat 1 are 1/20. The chances of the entire scenario have no impact on the probability of the individual rolls

      • Bill Ricker@fosstodon.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        6 hours ago

        @FearfulSalad @brian
        The Gambler’s Fallacy even shows up in humor.

        Hitchhiker: “thank you, but aren’t you even a little worried picking up hitchhikers?”

        Driver: “nah bro, the odds of a car having TWO serial killers is too tiny to worry about.”

      • brian@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Right but the way I took the meme was that you would roll until you get a 1, then deciding the next roll is the “real” one.

        • Cavemanfreak@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 hours ago

          That’s what the meme says, but probability doesn’t work that way. If you want the result from a roll, what you’ve roller before has no bearing on the result from this roll. Thus the chance for a single d20 roll is always 1/20, or 5%.