Contents
Plundering the Seas of Probability
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Video Game Watchdog National Institute On Media And The Family Shutting Down [11]
 
Modern Warfare 2 Infinity Ward's 'Most Successful PC Version' Yet [12]
 
New Tech, Design Details Of Project Natal To Emerge At Gamefest In February
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Character Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
3D Environment Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Network Programmer
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Texture Artist
 
Sony Online Entertainment
Brand Manager
 
Monolith Productions
Sr. Software Engineer, Engine - Monolith Productions - #113767
 
Crystal Dynamics
Sr. Level Designer
 
Gargantuan Studios
Lead World Designer
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
arrow Upping The Craft: Susan O'Connor On Games Writing [6]
 
arrow Small Developers: Minimizing Risks in Large Productions - Part II [6]
 
arrow iPhone Piracy: The Inside Story [48]
 
arrow And Yet It Grows: Analyzing the Size and Growth of the European Game Market [5]
 
arrow NPD: Behind the Numbers, October 2009 [13]
 
arrow Reflecting On Uncharted 2: How They Did It [5]
 
arrow Sponsored Feature: Rasterization on Larrabee -- Adaptive Rasterization Helps Boost Efficiency
 
arrow Postmortem: Wadjet Eye's The Blackwell Convergence [2]
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Accepting the Inherent Value of Games
 
Planckogenesis, Part II: Song Structure & Gravy Train [1]
 
Designing Games Is About Matching Personalities [1]
spacer
About
spacer News Director:
Leigh Alexander
Features Director:
Christian Nutt
Editor At Large:
Chris Remo
Advertising:
John 'Malik' Watson
Recruitment/Education:
Gina Gross
 
Features
  Plundering the Seas of Probability
by Tyler Sigman
3 comments
Share RSS
 
 
January 22, 2008 Article Start Previous Page 3 of 5 Next
 

Custom Dice Worthy of Odin Himself...or Not

Those two squigglies towards the left are actually sea serpents, by the way.

Advertisement

Why have Axes and Double Axes instead of say, Axes and Swords? User interface issues, honestly. Rather than introduce another symbol, I believe it's more thematic and easier for the player to count number of axes, instead of axes plus swords. It's also easier for me to write tight rules. For example, "You succeed on a 2 or more axes" is easily understood and processed, whereas "You succeed on any of the following combos: 2 axes, any number of swords, or any combination of axes and swords" is not as simple.

I arrived at the above face distribution by process of design iteration. Iteration -- you know, trying something and seeing if it works.

Yeah, I hadn't heard of iteration either until I worked on some paper games.

    SFX: RIM SHOT

    The writer smiles and briefly envisions a successful stand-up career.

    MONTAGE: STAND UP COMIC LIFE, ULTIMATELY ENDING IN HUMILIATION.

But I digress.

In this case, the design iteration for arriving at a good face distribution was mainly just math. That is, I did all the calculations below for some different face distributions and then adjusted the faces and the game rules until I liked the results.

Let's take a look at the numbers and mechanics associated with these new fancy custom dice. Probability, per die:

  • pBlank = 1/6 = 16.7%

  • pMonster = 2/6 = 33.3%

  • pAxe = 2/6 = 33.3%

  • pDAxe = 1/6 = 16.7%

Armed with this info, let's finally dive into some of the dice-related mechanics in the game. Obviously you don't have a full copy of the rulebook, but I'll try to cover enough detail to give you some context for the rules.

SEA MONSTER CHECK:
Roll both dice. If any MONSTER symbols are shown, then the ship has encountered one.

A Sea Monster in a Sea Zone

Any time a Longship sails through a sea zone with a MONSTER in it, any players without Shamans onboard their ship must make a check to see if a vile sea beast is encountered. Hitting a monster results in loss of a crewman and the player must draw a damage card and apply the damage markers to the ship. I wanted this to happen approximately half of the time. (It's always good to have a design goal before you get mired in the numerical analysis.)

To figure the chance of this happening, it's easiest to use the concept of "converse probability." Essentially, we just have to calculate the chance of a monster not occurring on either die, and then subtract this from unity (100%) to see how likely it is for at least one monster to show.

  • pNOMONSTERS = 4/6 * 4/6 = 16/36 = 4/9.

In plain language, there is a 4/6 chance on each die that a monster will not appear. In order to roll both dice and have no monsters, each die must satisfy this requirement. In this case, we multiply the probabilities as shown above. There is a 4/9 chance of rolling no monsters at all.

  • pAtLeastOneMonster = 1 - 4/9 = 5/9 = 55.6%

So there is a 55.6% chance of the player hitting a monster. This number is close enough to my design intent for the monsters and shouldn't really require any major balance tweaks.

Since there is a 2/6 chance of rolling a monster on each individual die, it's very easy to make the mistake of trying to calculate the chance of rolling at least one monster on two dice this way:

  • pAtLeastOneMonster(WRONG) = 2/6 + 2/6 = 4/6 = 2/3 = 66.7%

To see why this is erroneous, consider rolling 2d6. What are the chances of rolling a 4 or above on at least one die?

  • p4orAbove(WRONG) = 3/6 + 3/6 = 6/6 = 100%.

Hmmm, suspicious. Rolling 2 dice, you certainly are not guaranteed to roll 4 or above on at least one die, yet this calculation says you should be. As a general rule of thumb, if you are doing probability calcs that say an event is 100% likely to happen, most of the time something has gone wrong.

It gets even worse if you look at the chance of rolling 2+ on at least one die:

  • p2orAbove(WRONG) = 5/6 + 5/6 = 10/6 = 167%.

Danger, Will Robinson! You've invented the equivalent of the perpetual motion machine! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion_machine). It's just not valid to add probabilities when you have two independent events going on. Here, each die is an independent event.

You can only add probabilities when you have a single event with multiple success criteria -- for example, checking for a King or an Ace by drawing one card from a deck. In this case,:

  • pACEorKING = 4/52 + 4/52 = 8/52

This is a totally valid way of adding probabilities, because you are just adding success criteria for a single event.

 
Article Start Previous Page 3 of 5 Next
 
Comments

Robert Baxter
profile image
This is a great statistical breakdown, and makes me want to re-evaluate the probability models for games like Doom, Descent, and Mutant Chronicles.

All of the games I mention use probability and custom cut dice combinations to evoke a specific model of probabilities for weapon and ability differentiation.

Do you find that the decision for using custom cut dice was more a matter of making your game unique, or was it to map the probabilities in a more grokkable fashion for the player?

Diego R. Pons
profile image
I find it surprising that still needs to be remarked why articles like this are being posted in this site.
Awareness of how game mechanics work at their core is what true game design is all about.

And as a player, even though in a lot of games users are not aware of how probability is involved; there's still a lot of gamers like myself that enjoy clear feedback of probability components and the action of throwing digital dice whatever the shape this takes.

Tyler Sigman
profile image
Thanks for the comments. Robert, re: your question: it was a mix of the reasons you stated.

First, it adds a little more personality to the game. It's a little more fun to check for axes and sea monsters than just a check things like "4 or above on d6". Goes with the theme better.

Second, the symbols are a bit more grokkable, as you've pointed out. I'm hoping the rules are more memorable, and less checking of reference tables will be required. Rolling two dice and checking for sea monsters when passing through a Sea Monster-inhabited sea zone maps well to memory (in theory).

Some of the combos I found I needed to do just made more sense with the symbols, whereas they seemed really clumsy with straight d6s. For example, the raiding rules: checking for axes and taking casualties on sea monsters is sorta simple, whereas "5-6 equals 1 success, 6 = two successes, and a roll of 2-3 is a casualty" is just a little more of a mouthful.

Of course, I'm just using normal d6s to prototype.

I'm not saying that custom dice are categorically better; but I like the theme-ey-ness.


none
 
Comment:
 


Submit Comment