damerell: (roleplaying)
Add MemoryShare This Entry
posted by [personal profile] damerell at 04:33pm on 01/05/2021
I have dice. I have dice in a multitude of shapes [1] and colours. But something that's been bothering me for a while [2] is... are they any good?


Some manufacturers of polyhedral dice will boast of their precision, but they're long on information about proxy outcomes (if you stack 20 of our d20s in a tube, they always come out to the same height, so they must be all the same) and manufacturing processes, short on actual facts about testing.

A few obsessives have come up with arrangements normally involving cups that shake the dice and OCR of the results, so there's some interesting data about individual types.

Particularly I have grave suspicions about the d20, which is unfortunate because both 3e and 5e D&D care strongly not just about the average value but the chance of hitting particular values. I suspect, although this is sheer guesswork, it would be better to roll a normal d10 and a high/low die.

Casinos and backgammon fiends seem to have very good dice, but vexingly don't want to make them in any other sizes.

We've been playing on roll20 during the plague, and well, _computers_ can generate perfectly good random numbers on demand. Hooray! But IDK I want to go back to rolling bits of plastic on the table and onto the floor.

Trouble is, computers take up a lot of space on the actual gaming table, and lack a certain tactility.

First thought: perhaps there is a kind of dice which are more definitely known to be as fair as practically possible?

Second thought: a physical object with a computer in it. How about, IDK, a Raspberry Pi Zero with a speaker and a little screen attached to it, and a mechanical key numberpad attached with buttons saying things like '2d4' and '1d12'. Hit the button and the screen displays the outcome while the speaker yells it out.

Bit of a fiddly mass of objects, and perhaps you want one or two switches (eg if I hit "3d6" do I want to be told "15" first or "6, 4, 5"?).

The next thing I discover is that there are "button box controllers", USB devices mostly for flight and driving games which are what they sound like, a box with a bunch of chunky buttons and switches on top. A DIY button box controller is a practical project, and in particular something that gets suggested a lot is reusing old hard drive caddies because they're hardy metal boxes which you own already. We get the tactility because we're using actual buttons, and also now we can buy the buttons from electronics shops for pennies.

And now, of course, the Pi can live _in_ the box, probably with a battery pack because it's going to be pretty obnoxious having something on the gaming table with a power cable attached.

However... everyone's got a smartphone, and they're probably on the gaming table already. Existing dice rolling programs for smartphones aren't really what are wanted (they try and offer you all the options, which is all very well for Roll20 when you've got an entire computer screen to look at and it's all you're meant to be looking at); what I want is something where I load "dungeonquest" and it shows me a screen with "d6, d10, d12, 4d10 and tell me the individual results not the total", reads the results out [3], and there's just a little UI element in the corner of the screen to go back to one of these crowded roll-arbitary-dice interfaces.


[1] Six.
[2] Thirty-five years.
[3] I have no idea if this would be obnoxious or helpful in practice but it seems worth giving it a go.
There are 13 comments on this entry. (Reply.)
mtbc: photograph of me (Default)
posted by [personal profile] mtbc at 04:59pm on 01/05/2021
Now I wonder what the most convenient means would be of discovering the randomness of specific real dice.
damerell: NetHack. (Default)
posted by [personal profile] damerell at 06:07pm on 01/05/2021
fear if a procedure is good it's not convenient (eg these automated shake-and-OCR contraptions). There are some convenient procedures; the best known is dropping the die in some water and seeing if it tends to float one way up, but while I can believe that finds some bad dice I don't think it demonstrates the survivors are good.
simont: A picture of me in 2016 (Default)
posted by [personal profile] simont at 05:37pm on 02/05/2021
Wait, I know this one. If the die doesn't drown, you burn it as a witch?
watervole: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] watervole at 07:41pm on 01/05/2021
I'd rather roll real dice. I'm perfectly happy if they're only 95% random. I'll never notice the difference.
watervole: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] watervole at 07:42pm on 01/05/2021
You should see the D20s we had when I was a student!

Vastly inferior plastic to what we have now. They chipped easily and ended up more like spheres, so I'm perfectly happy with the better ones we have now.

And they're pretty!
damerell: NetHack. (Default)
posted by [personal profile] damerell at 11:40am on 02/05/2021
I remember similar (and the "famous red dice", which once turned up, in 5 rolls, boxcars 4 times and one 11). I dunno. I like dice, but (say) in a system with strong effects for throwing natural 1s and 20s on d20, I do want them to come up 5% of the time.

You say "I'm perfectly happy if they're only 95% random" but... they could be a lot worse than that and we'd never know.
shermarama: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] shermarama at 02:23am on 02/05/2021
Physical objects to throw, that have tilt switches in them so they know when they've been thrown, and have ID tags (matching indicative shape) so the coordinating program / app knows which have been thrown, and then generates an appropriate random number?
damerell: NetHack. (Default)
posted by [personal profile] damerell at 11:36am on 02/05/2021
This is an attractive idea; people _like_ throwing physical dice. There's dice with the "talk to a phone" bit in, but they're expensive and the randomisation is still done by physical orientation.

Unfortunately it also sounds harder to do. :-/
ewx: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] ewx at 07:34am on 02/05/2021
If you actually want to pursue a Pi-based approach I have a spare model B r2 which you could have. I realize that Pis are so cheap that sourcing the hardware isn't really the limiting factor on this line of attack though.
damerell: NetHack. (Default)
posted by [personal profile] damerell at 11:26am on 02/05/2021
Quite so, especially since I think a Pi Zero would do and they're about a fiver, but thanks.
vatine: Generated with some CL code and a hand-designed blackletter font (Default)
posted by [personal profile] vatine at 08:35am on 03/05/2021
Used to be that GameScience dice were classed in the "pretty good" category (mainly because they were not tubled post-moulding, so were much more likely to retain the intended shape). No idea if they're still manufactured, though.

But, yeah, you'd need at least several hundred recorded rolls to have the beginnings of "investigate randomness" (I suspect a combination of "just an occurrence histogram" and maybe a chi-square would be useful). I suspect it would not be that hard to knock up a small X11 app[1] with N buttons to click on (each button just recording another line in a text file and possibly keeping a running counter), then rely on Eyeball Mk1 to do the OCR and the app to do the recording.

[1] I have mostly done X11 through CLX, the X11 bindings for Common Lisp, where it is pretty easy to get a minimum viable app up, and as usual painful to get something that works well.
damerell: NetHack. (Default)
posted by [personal profile] damerell at 05:35pm on 03/05/2021
My impression is that GameScience were so classed _by GameScience_ - in particular, they tended to have flash left between two faces you had to cut off yourself, and if you didn't get that right, you've got two definitely-bogus faces.

I think "several hundred rolls" very definitely sounds less feasible than drilling some holes in an old drive caddy.
vatine: Generated with some CL code and a hand-designed blackletter font (Default)
posted by [personal profile] vatine at 02:25pm on 05/05/2021
The GameScience dice I have owned all had a visible imperfection from where the sprue was on the mould, but nothing I would characterise as "noticeably requiring any cutting or filing". But, I don't think I have seen a GS die produced after, um, 1992-or-so (possibly not after 1988-or-so), so I can only generalise from them. I'd say that they seemed fair. But, I have not at ALL taken the time to do a proper investigation (and these days, most of my RPG needs are fulfilled by D6).

I guess what constitutes "least resistance, at least for a quick check" really depends. With an estimated 15-20 minutes knocking up a "up to 20 clicky-buttons and maybe 25 rolls per minute", getting a single die to 300 rolls looks like about 35 minutes. Making a more compicated mechanical system is most probably worth it if (1) you want to do it as an exercise in hw/sw integration and/or (2) you want to test more than a single die or test it into thousands of rolls.

I'd personally knock up a small app and test a single one, first. If writing the analysis code was interesting enough, I'd then look at a Raspberry Pi, a camera of some sort, and a way of shaking/rolling the die.

April

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
    1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10 11
 
12
 
13
 
14 15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30