The chance to role three 1s with three dice is 1/216, or 0.463%. The chance to do that twice in a row is 1/46656, or 0.0021%. This is the same chance for rolling six 1s with six dice. If you role six dice 32,340 times, you will more likely than not roll all 1s at least once. If you roll three dice 363 times, you will probably roll three ones at any point at least twice (not necessarily twice in a row).
As for how many times you would need to roll three dice to likely get three 1s twice in a row; that's a little more difficult to figure out. Hmm, an ordered list of n items has n-1 in-a-row pairs. So, if I'm thinking this through right, you would need to roll three dice 32,341 times to probably get three 1s twice in a row. Maybe. But, if you roll, say, three 2s then three 3s, the next roll is already doomed. Even if it was three 1s, it would not satisfy the twice in a row stipulation, as the first part of the pair of rolls was already not three 1s; it was three 3s. I'm not sure if that changes things. Are the "three 2s then three 3s" and "three 3s then three 1s" pairs entirely separate? Do they need to be?
And the quote that is referenced seems to be this one:
"To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness."
Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest
pgn674 on
0
facetiousa wit so dryit shits sandRegistered Userregular
edited December 2010
It occurs to me that not everyone automatically knew the quote.
This saddens me.
facetious on
"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde
My dice seem to roll better for me as DM than as a player, personally speaking.
Well yeah, you have that screen in front of you.
Cute, but I'm known among my players as being very honest about my rolls. I've had plenty of bad spells as well as DM. Come to think about it, maybe I don't pay as much attention to when I'm rolling badly as DM, since when you're doing badly as a player you aren't accomplishing anything, when you're DMing you are still entertaining everyone.
The chance to role three 1s with three dice is 1/216, or 0.463%. The chance to do that twice in a row is 1/46656, or 0.0021%. This is the same chance for rolling six 1s with six dice. If you role six dice 32,340 times, you will more likely than not roll all 1s at least once. If you roll three dice 363 times, you will probably roll three ones at any point at least twice (not necessarily twice in a row).
As for how many times you would need to roll three dice to likely get three 1s twice in a row; that's a little more difficult to figure out. Hmm, an ordered list of n items has n-1 in-a-row pairs. So, if I'm thinking this through right, you would need to roll three dice 32,341 times to probably get three 1s twice in a row. Maybe. But, if you roll, say, three 2s then three 3s, the next roll is already doomed. Even if it was three 1s, it would not satisfy the twice in a row stipulation, as the first part of the pair of rolls was already not three 1s; it was three 3s. I'm not sure if that changes things. Are the "three 2s then three 3s" and "three 3s then three 1s" pairs entirely separate? Do they need to be?
And the quote that is referenced seems to be this one:
"To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness."
Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest
I remember that a character in a game I was running rolled two natural twenties and finished off a boss encounter that was otherwise set to wreck the entire party
Not impossible or anything, but it was a much deserved perfect roll after endless nights of twos and threes
Posts
mehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
love
drunk whippy
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
Highly relevant.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
It is never not relevant.
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
Well yeah, you have that screen in front of you.
As for how many times you would need to roll three dice to likely get three 1s twice in a row; that's a little more difficult to figure out. Hmm, an ordered list of n items has n-1 in-a-row pairs. So, if I'm thinking this through right, you would need to roll three dice 32,341 times to probably get three 1s twice in a row. Maybe. But, if you roll, say, three 2s then three 3s, the next roll is already doomed. Even if it was three 1s, it would not satisfy the twice in a row stipulation, as the first part of the pair of rolls was already not three 1s; it was three 3s. I'm not sure if that changes things. Are the "three 2s then three 3s" and "three 3s then three 1s" pairs entirely separate? Do they need to be?
And the quote that is referenced seems to be this one:
"To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness."
Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest
This saddens me.
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
Cute, but I'm known among my players as being very honest about my rolls. I've had plenty of bad spells as well as DM. Come to think about it, maybe I don't pay as much attention to when I'm rolling badly as DM, since when you're doing badly as a player you aren't accomplishing anything, when you're DMing you are still entertaining everyone.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
NERD
Also Rolled three twenties in a row and killed a black dragon once.
It's a boosted attack roll there, I imagine.
Man that is two focus down the drain.
but Risk?
in Risk I roll fire and thunder
I want mike and jerry to do a battle report of one of their warmachine matches.
I don't get to play the game enough myself, so I must live vicariously through them.
shit yes I love risk
from south america shall I rain blood across all the earth
This will be here until I receive an apology or Weedlordvegeta get any consequences for being a bully
From Importance of being Earnest?
Or am I off here?
Been a while since I had my Wilde.
yessss I was waiting for someone to post this
or even comics with jokes in them
a SILLY goose!
how does it feel to be so silly, you goose?
When determining the intelligence of my Psychic Gamma World character, no less.
It's from Importance, Lady Bracknell responding to Jack/Ernest Worthing admitting that he had "lost" both his parents.
I dunno if it's a reference to Wilde's parents or not.
I was thinking of this instead.
Not impossible or anything, but it was a much deserved perfect roll after endless nights of twos and threes
I concede fully. My mind has been illuminated with the light of not one, but two dousing rods that point to wet places.
I can't believe I watched this whole thing and was interested by it.
Jesus Henry Obama Christ, same here.
And I don't even play Dungeons and Dragons, nor give a shit about dice, never used em in my entire life.