[GZG] [DICE MATH] Dice Pain... Never... Ending

["Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@xxxxxxxx>]

I haven't seen anyone necessarily refute my approach of working backward from all possible
combinations producing 19 points on two dice. It's vaguely Monte Carlo-ish. (It may
contain mistakes)

Now, I see the point about 11 in 36 for 1+ 6's. And in fact, I suppose a similar logic
applies further along. 

First roll:
Odds of 6 on dice A: 6 in 36
Odds of 6 on dice B: 6 in 36
The 6,6 result is really one result, so 11 in 36. But we know that really means 10/36
chance of getting ONE six, 1 in 36 chance of 6,6. 
But wait, some of those other numbers are significant too! 
6,4 6,5 5,6 5,4 are all significant because they actually cause an extra damage point. 

So really, we have options to score 2, 3 or 4 points in the first roll and still proceed
with the further analysis. The 2 point case isn't complete though, because 4,4 4,5 5,5 5,4
all score two but don't let us go on. 

Odds of scoring 2 points and being able to go on: 6/36
Odds of scoring 3 points and being able to go on: 4/36
Odds of scoring 4 points and being able to go on: 1/36

Each of these leads to a separate analysis, of sorts. If you've scored 4, you've just got
the same analysis all over again (roll 2D, what are our odds of various outcomes that let
you proceed?). If you rolled 3, you have 1D to proceed with. Similarly, if you scored 2,
you've got 1 die to proceed with. 

Anyway, this all goes ugly places. And really, other than as some mathematical masochism,
I'm not sure it serves much gainful purpose. We really should give this thing a tag or
take it offline to another forum. We're not really discussing much GZG stuff anymore. 

Tomb
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l