The difference in results between the trials will be because of two variables:
1) The damage done to each target - in this case anywhere between 6 and 36.
2) Whether or not each target makes it saving throw - rolled separately for each target, not one roll for the whole group.
@arthur05 In an earlier comment you said "well 6d6 is 36". You do realise that 6d6 means that one 6 sided die is rolled six separate times, giving a total result of anywhere between 6 and 36?
i believed that the dice is rolled only once and then the result is multiplied by 6, so the result could be only 6, 12,18... up to 36 and not any number between 6 and 36.
can you confirm that the result is the sum of 6 different rolls?
and talking of weapon damage, for weapons that have let's say a 2d4 dmg roll a single roll is used and multiplied by2 or 2 different rolls are used?
@arthur05 In an earlier comment you said "well 6d6 is 36". You do realise that 6d6 means that one 6 sided die is rolled six separate times, giving a total result of anywhere between 6 and 36?
i believed that the dice is rolled only once and then the result is multiplied by 6, so the result could be only 6, 12,18... up to 36 and not any number between 6 and 36.
can you confirm that the result is the sum of 6 different rolls?
and talking of weapon damage, for weapons that have let's say a 2d4 dmg roll a single roll is used and multiplied by2 or 2 different rolls are used?
I am not sure of all the mechanics, but 6d6 is definitely six independent dice rolls summed up. Even looking at screenshots in this thread is sufficient to demonstrate this, as one monster took 23 damage, which is a prime number.
"and talking of weapon damage, for weapons that have let's say a 2d4 dmg roll a single roll is used and multiplied by2 or 2 different rolls are used?"
Two different rolls. The reason why I always pick a bastard sword (2d4) over a long sword (1d8) is that a b/sword will do 2-8 damage whereas a l/sword does 1-8 damage.
it's an old game
it's 20 years old
it's forgiveable
maybe it's time we made a brand new one and,
revisited all the math, all the rules and the general comment of the DUNGEON MASTER in 1 or many encounters
for instance, "it's a gibberling. it's not going to make the saving throw."
DM: "The party is hit by a fireball doing......" (rolls 6 x 6-sided dice and adds together the 6 results) "xx damage to each party member"
Player 1: (rolls 1 x 20-sided die) "I failed my save and take full damage (minus any modifiers)" or "I made my save and take half damage"
Player 2: as per Player 1
Player 3: as per Player 1 etc, etc.
This thread reminds of me of some mechanics discussions which were discussed on the forum, where I do not recall the exact result & I do not have BG installed to test.
Does each character affected by a fireball spells rolls his saves and damage roll independently, or is there one roll for all characters?
If you save against a 6d6 fireball spell, do you take 3d6 damage or 0.5 * 6d6? It affects the variance of the damage, even if the mean is the same.
EDIT: from the logs above I guess the roles are probably separate most of the time, but does it depend on whether enemies are hit at the same exact time, as with spells in sequencers?
The rolls for each character are all individual, whether the spell hits at the same time or not.
For the damage calculation my understanding is that the normal methodology is to roll base damage, reduce or increase that as a result of any resistance to that damage type and the saving throw then determines the proportion of that damage that you take (in the case of a fireball that would be a possible reduction of 50%). However, I have sometimes seen results that seem inconsistent with that, so I'm not sure that's always correct. Someone like @Bubb who knows far more than me about the workings of the game might be able to give a better answer.
OK, another open question would be whether halved damage (if saving throw is made) is rounded up or down.
If it is rounded up then with a saving throw of 16 and with 16 hp a mutated gibberling should have about a 32% chance to walk away from a 6d6 fireball. It is almost the same when rounded down, since for it to matter the Gibberling has to make his saving throw and roll (exactly) an 31 with 6d6.
inductive reasoning here informs us 1 such encounter tells you about 1000 such encounters
One particular sample will tell you nothing about how right/wrong is pseudo random in this game. Even using inductive reasoning you need at least some data pool to make an assumption
Even if all of the gibberlings would survive your fireball, you wouldn't be able to judge about random having only one data sample, even if probablity of that event is extremely low.
Looking at the Wand of Fire, its fireball ability is currently doing 6d5+6 instead of its listed 6d6. As such the damage output is a few points higher, and I'll be filing a bug report.
Have you, just maybe, watched the show Sherlock one time too many? Because I might need to watch out for this issue, because I've watched the first 3 seasons nearly to death. The 4th not nearly so many times, but I didn't hate it.
This thread reminds of me of some mechanics discussions which were discussed on the forum, where I do not recall the exact result & I do not have BG installed to test.
Does each character affected by a fireball spells rolls his saves and damage roll independently, or is there one roll for all characters?
If you save against a 6d6 fireball spell, do you take 3d6 damage or 0.5 * 6d6? It affects the variance of the damage, even if the mean is the same.
EDIT: from the logs above I guess the roles are probably separate most of the time, but does it depend on whether enemies are hit at the same exact time, as with spells in sequencers?
In vanilla BG2, it’s 3d6 on a successful save, 6d6 on a failed save. In EE, it’s 6d6, save for half (i.e. lower variance).
Eh, that reminds me a bit of the stuff I reflexively start to write when I get a bit too intoxicated... It's a really wild range, and while I'm quite sure some is brilliant, it is by and large very, very questionable. Surprisingly coherent though! Inspiring if I wasn't a crazy hobo!
Well, as I have hinted, I'm very in touch with the chaotic aspects of the mind, and what seems insane can sometimes have kernels of thought that will blow your mind.
My favorite riddle, one I think I invented, is a good example: Tadpoles turn to frogs! It's a trick obviously, and to understand it, you might have to be a bit crazy. It's a koan I think, to be proper, so it's not strictly asking anything, it's there to spur some very aberrant thoughts. I'm also very religious, so the connection to Christianity is more intuitive to me.
But yes, I might be entirely wrong, and you right.
Looking at the Wand of Fire, its fireball ability is currently doing 6d5+6 instead of its listed 6d6. As such the damage output is a few points higher, and I'll be filing a bug report.
As @Hurricane so kindly reminded me on the ticket, this is intentional and my memory is terrible. From the Wand of Fire's description:
The fireball inflicts 6d6 points of damage, but all 1s rolled are counted as 2s.
The only way to simulate this with a straight dice roll is to do 1d5+1. Mathematically, it's not equivalent--even distribution of damage from 2-6 (4 average) vs. a double-weighted 2 and even weighted 3-6 (3.67 average)--but it's the best we can do without a lot of silly buggers workarounds.
I’m somewhat confused by the point of this thread?
Is it that random results are indeed random? Because OPs testing clearly seems to evidence this.
Or is it to argue that the BG2EE engine isn’t calculating probabilities correctly? In which case we would first need to know the expected survival rates for Gibberlings and then need a lot more test results. From what I can gather the 16 results so far seem to fall within a reasonably expected range so aren’t evidence of any BG2EE engine issues.
I'm confused as well. The results seem pretty much what I would expect, and don't indicate a problem with the engine's calculations at all. Could someone help us out and explain what the hubbub is about?
Every so often, a player's perception bias results in a post about how the game's RNG is off. Nothing could provide better catnip to a forum of D&D nerds than doing math--except possibly rules lawyers arguing over obscure rules arcana mentioned in passing in the PHB, page 87, paragraph 4.
Has anyone yet explained why HPs in the EE games are on average higher than expected from the die rolls? I suspect that's not the RNG directly, but some other factor influencing it. What that could be though I have no idea - could be a challenge for @Bubb.
Has anyone yet explained why HPs in the EE games are on average higher than expected from the die rolls? I suspect that's not the RNG directly, but some other factor influencing it. What that could be though I have no idea - could be a challenge for @Bubb.
HPs are set explicitly in creature files so it must have been a design decision. The only creatures that actually roll for HPs are your party members during the level-up process.
Comments
3 staggered away: 1 times
2 staggered away: 2 times
1 staggered away: 8 times
0 staggered away: 5 times
50% of the time or, most of the time, 1 staggers away
6% of the time 3 stagger away *this result seems anomalous and could be cut out
12% of the time 2 will stagger away
31% of the time 0 will stagger away
note
"the 8hp lowly gibberling specimen will die even if it makes it's saving throw, which it did a few times"
how much chance is chance.?
1. each NPC affected by a fireball spell rolls their saving throws and damage rolls independently from the 1 cast of the fireball
1) The damage done to each target - in this case anywhere between 6 and 36.
2) Whether or not each target makes it saving throw - rolled separately for each target, not one roll for the whole group.
(edited because I managed to confuse myself)
I could say 3d6 though
i believed that the dice is rolled only once and then the result is multiplied by 6, so the result could be only 6, 12,18... up to 36 and not any number between 6 and 36.
can you confirm that the result is the sum of 6 different rolls?
and talking of weapon damage, for weapons that have let's say a 2d4 dmg roll a single roll is used and multiplied by2 or 2 different rolls are used?
I am not sure of all the mechanics, but 6d6 is definitely six independent dice rolls summed up. Even looking at screenshots in this thread is sufficient to demonstrate this, as one monster took 23 damage, which is a prime number.
Two different rolls. The reason why I always pick a bastard sword (2d4) over a long sword (1d8) is that a b/sword will do 2-8 damage whereas a l/sword does 1-8 damage.
it's 20 years old
it's forgiveable
maybe it's time we made a brand new one and,
revisited all the math, all the rules and the general comment of the DUNGEON MASTER in 1 or many encounters
for instance, "it's a gibberling. it's not going to make the saving throw."
I'm sorry, it's not moot. Combat works like this:
DM: "The party is hit by a fireball doing......" (rolls 6 x 6-sided dice and adds together the 6 results) "xx damage to each party member"
Player 1: (rolls 1 x 20-sided die) "I failed my save and take full damage (minus any modifiers)" or "I made my save and take half damage"
Player 2: as per Player 1
Player 3: as per Player 1 etc, etc.
What has 3d6 got to do with anything?
The rolls for each character are all individual, whether the spell hits at the same time or not.
For the damage calculation my understanding is that the normal methodology is to roll base damage, reduce or increase that as a result of any resistance to that damage type and the saving throw then determines the proportion of that damage that you take (in the case of a fireball that would be a possible reduction of 50%). However, I have sometimes seen results that seem inconsistent with that, so I'm not sure that's always correct. Someone like @Bubb who knows far more than me about the workings of the game might be able to give a better answer.
If it is rounded up then with a saving throw of 16 and with 16 hp a mutated gibberling should have about a 32% chance to walk away from a 6d6 fireball. It is almost the same when rounded down, since for it to matter the Gibberling has to make his saving throw and roll (exactly) an 31 with 6d6.
Even if all of the gibberlings would survive your fireball, you wouldn't be able to judge about random having only one data sample, even if probablity of that event is extremely low.
Under this actual value, two occurrences happen:
Combining these gets you 0.74595 + 0.00335 = 0.7493. If you were to apply this to, say, 16 samples of four MGs, you'd expect 47.9552 total dead MGs.
And here we see 49 dead MGs out of the 64 total hit. A true 6d6 should be around 44/64 dead MGs.
Important footnote: 64 is still not a large enough sample size to draw meaningful conclusions.
Top notch reading, this thread!
In vanilla BG2, it’s 3d6 on a successful save, 6d6 on a failed save. In EE, it’s 6d6, save for half (i.e. lower variance).
allow me to finish it
https://divinefather.wordpress.com/
I'll give it a look some time, this site.
Coherent isn't the adjective I would've chosen...
My favorite riddle, one I think I invented, is a good example: Tadpoles turn to frogs! It's a trick obviously, and to understand it, you might have to be a bit crazy. It's a koan I think, to be proper, so it's not strictly asking anything, it's there to spur some very aberrant thoughts. I'm also very religious, so the connection to Christianity is more intuitive to me.
But yes, I might be entirely wrong, and you right.
As @Hurricane so kindly reminded me on the ticket, this is intentional and my memory is terrible. From the Wand of Fire's description:
The only way to simulate this with a straight dice roll is to do 1d5+1. Mathematically, it's not equivalent--even distribution of damage from 2-6 (4 average) vs. a double-weighted 2 and even weighted 3-6 (3.67 average)--but it's the best we can do without a lot of silly buggers workarounds.
Is it that random results are indeed random? Because OPs testing clearly seems to evidence this.
Or is it to argue that the BG2EE engine isn’t calculating probabilities correctly? In which case we would first need to know the expected survival rates for Gibberlings and then need a lot more test results. From what I can gather the 16 results so far seem to fall within a reasonably expected range so aren’t evidence of any BG2EE engine issues.
HPs are set explicitly in creature files so it must have been a design decision. The only creatures that actually roll for HPs are your party members during the level-up process.