Timeline for How does rolling two d20 and taking the higher affect the average outcome?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5, 2019 at 16:22 | comment | added | Exempt-Medic | Your "benefit" statistic here is actually the expected difference between rolling with disadvantage and with advantage. This is precisely why the average "benefit" is double the actual difference of means between normal rolls and ones with advantage | |
| Jun 2, 2016 at 15:09 | comment | added | nitsua60 | So I think this latest edit has clarified my... dissatisfaction? The "benefit" statistic is an accurate expression of "if I assume the lower of the two would have been my result, then how much better off am I taking the higher?" But why start off assuming the lower roll would have been the result? | |
| Jun 2, 2016 at 14:58 | history | edited | Drunk Cynic | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 1372 characters in body |
| Jun 2, 2016 at 13:57 | comment | added | nitsua60 | Your "benefit" strikes me as a strange statistic. Viewed one way: it reads the rolling of a 20 followed by a 1 as a benefit of 19, even though in plain language the second roll didn't benefit the roller at all. But we don't want to chain ourselves to thinking that the rolls are sequential, so let's imagine simultaneous rolls of 1 and 20: the claimed benefit is 19. But had I rolled 1 die and received one of those two results there'd be a 50% chance of getting a result 19 better than 1, and a 50% chance of getting a result 0 better than 1. It's a weird construct; I'm not quite sure what it adds. | |
| Jun 2, 2016 at 4:31 | history | answered | Drunk Cynic | CC BY-SA 3.0 |