Meneas the faerie-dust grim reaper. :p
Signy isn't sure how much she likes fey, her experiences with them so far have been either very good or very bad. But she's pretty sure the nixie doesn't smell nearly as bad as the loggers. That's worth something.
That's Meneas' Order of the Blossom edict coming in, too. "The cavalier cannot refuse a fey’s request for aid unless it will interfere with his existing duties, or he believes the fey seeks to directly oppose his other aims and goals." Neither of those two exceptions seems to apply here.
Sorry, I probably wasn’t clear enough as to what I had in mind. I’m guessing in a mostly (?) civil dispute – though Corax hasn’t denied Melianse’s claim that he set his men on her with axes, before she charmed them into the stand-off we walked into – there’s a certain amount of discretion that goes into assessing penalties and damages.
I mean, it probably looks like a fairly clear-cut case to Lina. Unless these guys are really good at the lumberjack shtick, presumably Melianse heard them chopping, politely asked them to leave her trees alone, and things went downhill from there.
Nonetheless, Lina definitely wants to figure out what’s a fair claim of compensation, and there’s probably a limit to how to break the situation down into discrete complaints, but if Corax balks at shelling out, Lina’s definitely petty and tricksy enough to lowball individual offenses that add up to the total in an attempt to induce compliance. Sort of the “wow, you’re in over your head, aren’t you?” school of playing bad cop to Signy’s good cop. Still, she’s probably willing to pay for Corax’s crew's passage to Helikia once they settle things with the nixie, so they can a fresh start somewhere in our domains where there is available lumber.
Mneh, Lina’s probably happy to rule by fiat, mostly, as things come up. If there are laws actually on the books already in Helikia, they’re probably a collection of Lina’s edicts and precedents carried over from some poor sap’s textbook on Kyonin law. Making sure that there’s enough consistency that people know what to expect is a job for the lawyers. ;) I’m imagining something like the worst of what you would get if you crossed Roman law with – even worse – classical Greek.
*Shrugs helplessly.* The chaotic, witchy side of Lina is especially strong here. She’s more Mirkwood than Lorien, and while she talks a big game (those Diplomacy ranks), her background is closer to pretentious river pirates in frilly blouses than normal elven society.
If you’re still looking for something to make your kingdom role more concrete, the Councilor role can probably also include Chief Justice, to get Lina to pay more attention and Helikia’s jurisprudence into a less hair-pulling state. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The notion of a CG Caydenite Inquisitor as Chief Justice of a legal system is so deliciously ironic. But Signy lacks the impartiality for that sort of thing, unless Lina wants to lose a lot of cases in court that is. The one thing that would be working in Signy's favor in such a position is that she isn't corruptible. She's actually something of an ascetic as weird as that sounds.
Usually asceticism references renouncing worldly pleasure, which obviously is not true of her at all. It wouldn't make any sense for her to do so within her religion. Her asceticism is directed at the wealth/power nexus. As he sees it, those things are axiomatically corrupting.
I've (weirdly) spent a lot of time trying to develop some sort of Caydenite theology, and there is a sort of flaw that I've been unable to fix. If Cayden Cailean is about a sort of maximal-ish personal freedom, and opposition to tyranny, it is also stuck with tyranny in a sense. Sticking it to the man necessitates the existence of the man. Caydenites have no plan for ultimate victory, and certainly have no idea what to do afterward if they stumbled into it.
This would be a problem if monotheism were a thing, but Golarion is polytheistic so some few Caydenites who actually spent time thinking about such things, and they tend not to, could just shrug and say it's some other (right thinking) deity's job to figure that stuff out.
What I'm getting at is that it's an underdog religion, reactive (not reactionary) and subtly pessimistic. There is no Caydenite form of utopianism really. It's a common person's counterculturalism, standing in opposition to the inevitable abuses of (essentially inevitable) hierarchies.
Signy is ill-prepared to create a better society, she'd say that's a task for Helikia's citizens, and should be a democratic endeavor. In becoming a ruler, Signy sees Lina as having taken the first step onto the path of becoming a tyrant. Signy is there to watch for the signs and push back when Lina's mask slips. Signy is far more animated by justice and fairness than legalism.
More practically speaking about the moment. Signy is hoping for an agreement that doesn't cost anything aside for some time devoted to finding saplings. If Lina goes with some sort of assault-type charge against Corax, Signy would be pretty confident she could mount an excellent self-defense counterargument.
Now it might turn out that Corax forged his permit or had a hand in it. That would change things. But given current information Corax seems to be a victim of a third, unknown party. He's been wronged as well, punishing him for it is unjust.
I love the philosophy that you and Signy are developing! That sounds fantastic!
Brental's gonna speak for the trees. Also business. Because he's a weird druid who sees civilization as the natural outgrowth and product of the human(oid) animal. He came from an essentially Rousseauian philosophy and is progressing from there to Henry David Thoreau. Who's to say where he goes next?
---
Also, yeah, Brental is pretty convinced that the whole thing is Grigori's fault. He doesn't think Corax should be fined at all, but rather wants to use him to track Grigori down and take him out.
Oh, that is a neat spell, if it will work for lumber!
Again, to be clear, Lina's idea is that if we need to step in to actually provide the plants, that's great, but any expenses for it should come out of the ill-gotten gains.
If we can replace Melianse's trees without splashing hundreds of gp around for feather tokens, so much the better, and in which case Corax can hang onto "his" precious felled coachwood and find a stand to work that hasn't been claimed by another local.
Bis:
I didn't want to step on Brental's toes about spotting the forgery, too, but if it is Grigori messing around again, oh, it's on! I'm not sure what Lina might do to the villain if we catch him before she's had a chance to cool off, but it would probably be the sort of horrible you should expect from a Calistrian-adjacent witch with a taste for poisons. o.O
Of course, it's just a theory, but those lovely breadcrumbs that Rackal left are highly suggestive that our odious rabblerouser is at fault here.
I love having an "atypical" druid ^_^ I had hoped that investing in Linguistics would pay off to spot forgeries. It's time to get involved in some spycraft!
Also: poi-son, poi-son, POI-SON,
***
Chaotic Neutral Brental says "The trees can't be harmed if the nixie is armed."
I've (weirdly) spent a lot of time trying to develop some sort of Caydenite theology, and there is a sort of flaw that I've been unable to fix. If Cayden Cailean is about a sort of maximal-ish personal freedom, and opposition to tyranny, it is also stuck with tyranny in a sense. Sticking it to the man necessitates the existence of the man. Caydenites have no plan for ultimate victory, and certainly have no idea what to do afterward if they stumbled into it.
...
Signy is ill-prepared to create a better society, she'd say that's a task for Helikia's citizens, and should be a democratic endeavor. In becoming a ruler, Signy sees Lina as having taken the first step onto the path of becoming a tyrant. Signy is there to watch for the signs and push back when Lina's mask slips.
Noooo, my mask! :p
I do wonder sometimes what Lina might be like if she snaps and falls. So far I'm guessing it would probably look like some sort of Maleficent cosplay or something.
Also, because I’m an old woman (this is a distant memory from when I was a kid, and wow, broadcast television was a thing on my radar – weird! Is that still a thing that exists? XD ), I couldn’t help but think of this, as far as sticking it to the man goes and how (in the best case scenario) I imagine the back-and-forth between Lina and Signy might go about Lina needing to remember that she’s only an ordinary woman at the end of the day. :)
Hi, everyone! Work's been crazy, and I've just started traveling for a conference this morning, so things will continue to be hectic through to next week. I should be able to post off and on when I have time and internet access, but it might be spotty.
Bot me as needed, please!
I've been meaning to reply but have been distracted and delayed. I should get to something tomorrow.
Brental: the druid of many hats! High priest, gravedigger, surgeon, elemental warrior, diplomat, shapeshifter, animal trainer, and horticulturist. Get you a druid who can do it all! Eat your heart out, bards!
Might have to pick up incredible healer and healer's hands at this rate, or perchance signature skill for heal.
5 Ranks: When you treat deadly wounds, the target recovers hit points and ability damage as if it had rested for a full day.
Just some fun alignment stuff before Paizo does away with alignment forever (in 2E). Aligned outsiders are supposed to detect as an alignment from the time they have their first HD. As a native outsider, and an archon-blooded outsider at that, it's feasible that Brental could detect as strongly Lawful Good because of the quintessence of his being. But he ain't been Lawful in a minute and has so far tried to eschew Good as being too restrictive of a concept. That true neutrality certainly throws a kink in the works.
However, the Detect Evil spell has the following lovely little caveat:
Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
Without diving too hard into moral philosophy, especially because one can't overlay real-world metaphysics and epistemology onto fictional make-believe, this implies that Golarion's moral-planar metaphysics plants a flag firmly in the hill of intent being significant.
In any case, alignment is not immutable, even amongst aligned outsiders born of aligned quintessence. There are canonical examples of fallen angels and risen succubi. According to the above quoted text, a true neutral person who is really angry at someone and thinking really hard about killing them would detect as evil, even if they haven't actually committed the murder and never will.
Huh. Interesting. I've never noticed that before. But by the same token, I think that the other alignment detection spells would trigger as well, because of how they're written which is basically "works like detect evil except with focus on other alignments and being overwhelmed by alignment if you're its opposite."
Weird, but amusing.
<Shrug> I'm just making stuff up as I go.
That's the whole point of this game! Making stuff up as we go ^_^
Should have mentioned earlier but I'm at Phoenix Fan Fusion this weekend and posting will resume on Monday!
If there is any artist there you'd recommend I check out/support please let me know as I think we only covered a third of the vendor hall the first day xD
See yall on Monday~
I don't know that convention, but awesome! Have fun!
Yeah, never heard of it but it sounds great! Enjoy!
I hope you're having fun, DM!
My idea of a good con is arguably tragically nerdy - I have been known to schedule my holidays around academic conferences - so I can't claim to know about more normal fannish gatherings...
That said, albeit on the non-visual artist side of things, I gather Rachel Gold is going to be where you're at, of Being Emily fame? Honestly, I don't remember being absolutely enthralled by said novel, but it was fun and its heart was in the right place, I think, so I would be interested in seeing what else they've been up to since, if I were in a position to do so. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Signy, here's the last hundred d20 rolls that you have made, in order from your most recent post to the hundredth d20 roll last April.
4
9
14
12
12
19
19
12
2
7
7
7
12
10
16
17
8
19
7
19
4
10
14
18
16
12
3
14
4
15
4
9
3
16
14
14
5
1
17
15
9
18
3
5
4
14
2
5
15
13
16
6
18
9
5
20
10
6
9
14
19
15
14
19
2
5
2
2
9
6
1
16
15
18
8
9
7
4
12
20
6
4
10
2
8
7
3
14
5
14
8
18
10
5
11
4
13
8
13
The mean of these rolls is 10.08, with a standard deviation of 5.552 and a median of 9.5.
The distribution of rolls is as follows:
2: 6
3: 4
4: 8
5: 7
6: 4
7: 6
8: 5
9: 7
10: 5
11: 1
12: 6
13: 3
14: 10
15: 5
16: 5
17: 2
18: 5
19: 6
20: 2
The z-score on that is that the mean of your distribution of -0.728 standard deviations from the mean. In a two-tailed hypothesis test, that'd be a p-value of .4654, which is not significantly different at p < .05.
I definitely don't want to invalidate your experience of the dice roller, but that looks like a pretty normal distribution to me. Next I'll try to match it to a factor like what type of roll it was, breaking it down broadly by attack vs. skill.
Well that's all good news! I'd much rather it be selective bias on my part than an actual problem. I guess I'll shut up now. XD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bit more insight: your skill checks are overall better than your attack rolls.
Signy's average attack roll (over 29 attacks) has been 9.33 (σ = 5.96), while her average skill roll (over 69 rolls) has been 10.23 (σ = 5.38).
1 Attack
2 Attack
2 Attack
3 Attack
3 Attack
4 Attack
4 Attack
4 Attack
5 Attack
5 Attack
6 Attack
7 Attack
8 Attack
9 Attack
10 Attack
10 Attack
11 Attack
14 Attack
14 Attack
14 Attack
14 Attack
16 Attack
16 Attack
16 Attack
17 Attack
18 Attack
18 Attack
19 Attack
12 of your attack rolls have been 11 or higher, while 17 have been 10 or lower. Those four 14s and three 16s are the big rolls keeping the distribution from skewing too far down. The median of this set is 9. Overall, this means that the distribution is fairly symmetrical, with a skew of 0.145. Typically you need to see skew > 0.5 to be considered moderately skewed.
4 Attack
9 Skill Stealth
14 Skill Sense Motive
12 Skill Perception
12 Skill Kno (nat)
19 Skill Survival
19 Skill Sense Motive
12 Skill Diplomacy
2 Skill Diplomacy
7 Skill Appraise
7 Skill Appraise
7 Skill Appraise
12 Skill Appraise
10 Skill Appraise
16 Skill Appraise
17 Skill Appraise
8 Skill Appraise
19 Skill Perception
7 Attack
19 Attack
4 Attack
10 Attack
14 Skill Stealth
18 Attack
16 Attack
12 Skill Sense Motive
3 Skill Perception
14 Skill Stealth
4 Skill Perception
15 Skill Perception
4 Skill Dexterity
9 Skill Diplomacy
3 Attack
16 Attack
14 Attack
14 Attack
5 Skill Acrobatics
1 Attack
17 Attack
15 Skill Acrobatics
9 Skill Diplomacy
18 Skill Intimidate
3 Skill Diplomacy
5 Skill Sense Motive
4 Skill Kno (rel)
14 Skill Sense Motive
2 Skill Perception
5 Skill Diplomacy
15 Skill Survival
13 Skill Bluff
16 Attack
6 Attack
18 Attack
9 Skill Perception
5 Skill Diplomacy
20 Skill Diplomacy
10 Skill Perception
6 Skill Survival
9 Skill Diplomacy
14 Skill Diplomacy
19 Skill Diplomacy
15 Skill Diplomacy
14 Skill Diplomacy
19 Skill Diplomacy
2 Skill Diplomacy
5 Skill Diplomacy
2 Attack
2 Attack
9 Attack
6 Skill Perception
1 Skill Diplomacy
16 Skill Sense Motive
15 Skill Sense Motive
18 Skill Diplomacy
8 Skill Sense Motive
9 Skill Perception
7 Skill Diplomacy
4 Skill Kno (loc)
12 Skill Perception
20 Skill Sense Motive
6 Skill Kno (loc)
4 Skill Perception
10 Skill Sense Motive
2 Skill Kno (loc)
8 Skill Perception
7 Skill Sense Motive
3 Attack
14 Attack
5 Attack
14 Attack
8 Attack
18 Save Reflex
10 Attack
5 Attack
11 Attack
4 Attack
13 Skill Acrobatics
8 Skill Acrobatics
13 Save Reflex
If you want, it shouldn't be too difficult to visualize this stuff in plots either, so that you can see trends over time, color-coded by factor, or whatever else you might want to know. I do think that it's selective bias, but I definitely understand the frustration. You are, overall, rolling lower to hit than average--not by too much, but enough that you're noticing it.
polyfrequencies: Using statistics to demystify the real world since...uh...can I say 2007? That was my first formal stats course.
Again, this is very interesting. I have noticed a tendency to do better at skill checks compared to combat. It's not as great a difference as I would have thought, but it is there so it wasn't an illusion.
The other thing I wonder about is use of different statistical methods to look at the same thing, like in this case. My knowledge of statistics is fairly rudimentary and I don't know how your method, which is looking at variance from a cumulative average, i.e. how close is the average of my rolls to matching the 10.5 median, compares to the earlier poisson distribution, which looks at the even distribution of of particular outcomes. For example, how many 13's, how many 2's etc.
It seems to me the two should never argue with each other. A set of rolls in which there are 2 occurrences of every possible number should produce that median of 10.5. But, can they disagree under certain conditions? Obviously the earlier poisson distribution that was done showed more of a skew, but that is also clear from the raw data. Do you have an opinion about which of the two methods is better for looking at this particular kind of data?
I don't believe that the Poisson distribution is an appropriate method to observe this sort of random numerical data for the question you're asking. The Poisson method is used to look at the number of discrete events over time--how many times they happened. The Poisson is a count of the number of occurrences of an event.
Critically, a Poisson distribution also assumes that the mean and the variance are equal. But they're not. In a batch of 100 typical d20 rolls, you would have an average of 10.5 and a variance of 33.6. In your distribution, you have an average of 10.08 and a variance of 30.82. So it's just...not a Poisson distribution. It approximates a normal distribution.
The Poisson is basically what you described--looking at the number of 14s rolled in the distribution of 100 rolls. You can ask, with Poisson, what the likelihood is of rolling ten 14s in 100 rolls of a d20. If this was a perfect distribution, then you should see exactly five of each numerical value. So what is the likelihood of observing ten 14s in 100 events ?
Where λ is the known/expected average (5), x is the number of occurrences we're trying to observe, and e is (as always) Euler's constant (~2.718...). So that probability of observing 10 of any given roll (in this case 14) = [(5^10) * e^-5)] / 10! = 0.018.
So there's a 1.8% chance of observing any given number 10 times in 100 rolls.
Comparatively, there is a 5.6954 x 10^-91 chance of observing any given number 100 times. The greatest likelihood observations are seeing the given numbers either 4 or 5 times, with 17.55% for both. That's to be expected, all things considered.
100 5.69540181581923E-91
99 1.13908036316385E-89
98 2.25537911906442E-88
97 4.42054307336625E-87
96 8.57585356233054E-86
95 1.64656388396746E-84
94 3.12847137953818E-83
93 5.88152619353178E-82
92 1.09396387199691E-80
91 2.01289352447431E-79
90 3.66346621454326E-78
89 6.59423918617786E-77
88 1.17377457513966E-75
87 2.0658432522458E-74
86 3.59456725890769E-73
85 6.18265568532123E-72
84 1.05105146650461E-70
83 1.76576646372774E-69
82 2.93117232978805E-68
81 4.80712262085241E-67
80 7.7875386457809E-66
79 1.24600618332494E-64
78 1.96868976965341E-63
77 3.07115604065932E-62
76 4.72958030261535E-61
75 7.18896205997534E-60
74 1.0783443089963E-58
73 1.59594957731452E-57
72 2.33008638287921E-56
71 3.35532439134606E-55
70 4.7645606357114E-54
69 6.67038488999596E-53
68 9.20513114819443E-52
67 1.25189783615444E-50
66 1.67754310044695E-49
65 2.21435689258998E-48
64 2.87866396036697E-47
63 3.68468986926972E-46
62 4.64270923527985E-45
61 5.75695945174702E-44
60 7.02349053113136E-43
59 8.42818863735763E-42
58 9.945262592082E-41
57 1.15365046068151E-39
56 1.31516152517692E-38
55 1.47298090819816E-37
54 1.62027899901797E-36
53 1.74990131893941E-35
52 1.85489539807577E-34
51 1.9290912139988E-33
50 1.96767303827878E-32
49 1.96767303827878E-31
48 1.9283195775132E-30
47 1.85118679441268E-29
46 1.74011558674792E-28
45 1.60090633980808E-27
44 1.44081570582727E-26
43 1.267917821128E-25
42 1.09040932617008E-24
41 9.15943833982868E-24
40 7.51073943865951E-23
39 6.00859155092761E-22
38 4.68670140972354E-21
37 3.56189307138989E-20
36 2.63580087282852E-19
35 1.89777662843653E-18
34 1.32844363990557E-17
33 9.03341675135789E-17
32 5.96205505589621E-16
31 3.81571523577357E-15
30 2.36574344617962E-14
29 1.41944606770777E-13
28 8.23278719270507E-13
27 4.61036082791484E-12
26 2.48959484707401E-11
25 1.29458932047849E-10
24 6.47294660239243E-10
23 3.10701436914837E-09
22 1.42922660980825E-08
21 6.28859708315629E-08
20 2.64121077492564E-07
19 1.05648430997026E-06
18 4.01464037788698E-06
17 1.44527053603931E-05
16 4.91391982253366E-05
15 0.000157245434321077
14 0.000471736302963232
13 0.00132086164829705
12 0.00343424028557233
11 0.00824217668537358
10 0.0181327887078219
9 0.0362655774156438
8 0.0652780393481588
7 0.104444862957054
6 0.146222808139876
5 0.175467369767851
4 0.175467369767851
3 0.140373895814281
2 0.0842243374885684
1 0.0336897349954273
0 0.00673794699908547
Summing all of these probabilities up gives you 1, which is the total of all possible outcomes.
Poisson distributions are always skewed right by their very nature. The larger the λ, the closer the distribution will be to symmetrical, but we're dealing with small numbers here.
This is a good brief video on the subject.
---
Overall, I'm not sure what good it would do you to know how closely the distribution of values you have follows a Poisson distribution, because it shouldn't. Looking at what your other fellow player said:
I actually checked up your numbers. In the last 50 posts you rolled the 1d20 45 times and only got 13 times a number higher than 10.
According to the Poisson Distribution the likelihood of such event is only 1%, and summing up the probability of that happening even less times, you get a 2.2% probability of that happening 13 or less times :O
P(X = x) = (nCx) * p^x * (1 - p)^(n-x)
n is the total number of trials (45)
x is the number of events we're looking for with a given outcome (13)
p is the probability of success (0.5)
and (nCx) is the number of possible orderings of 45 trials in which we exactly 13 successes, which is n! / (x! * (n - x)!). There are over 73 billion possible orderings (73,006,209,045) of 13 Successes and 32 Failures that can possibly occur in a random drawing of 45 coin tosses. So we lump all of those together because we don't care about any specific ordering.
P(Success, 11-20) = p = 0.5
P(Failure, 1-10) = 1 - p = 0.5
n = 45
x = 13
Throw all that into a calculator and you get 0.0021. So there's a 0.21% chance of getting 13 successes and 32 failures.
But what exactly does that mean? The most likely events (22 or 23 successes) each have a 11.7% chance of occurring, and the total distribution of successes looks like this:
45 2.8421709430404E-14
44 1.27897692436818E-12
43 2.81374923361E-11
42 4.03304056817433E-10
41 4.23469259658305E-09
40 3.4724479291981E-08
39 2.31496528613207E-07
38 1.28976637370215E-06
37 6.12639027508522E-06
36 2.51862711309059E-05
35 9.06705760712611E-05
34 0.000288497287499467
33 0.000817408981248491
32 0.00207496126009232
31 0.00474276859449674
30 0.00980172176195993
29 0.0183782283036749
28 0.031351095341563
27 0.0487683705313202
26 0.0693024212813498
25 0.0900931476657547
24 0.107253747221137
23 0.117004087877604
22 0.117004087877603
21 0.107253747221137
20 0.0900931476657547
19 0.0693024212813498
18 0.0487683705313202
17 0.031351095341563
16 0.0183782283036749
15 0.00980172176195992
14 0.00474276859449674
13 0.00207496126009232
12 0.000817408981248491
11 0.000288497287499467
10 9.06705760712612E-05
9 2.51862711309059E-05
8 6.12639027508521E-06
7 1.28976637370215E-06
6 2.31496528613206E-07
5 3.4724479291981E-08
4 4.23469259658305E-09
3 4.03304056817433E-10
2 2.81374923361E-11
1 1.27897692436818E-12
0 2.8421709430404E-14
So you have a 23.4% chance of getting the average (22.5 successes).
And if you rolled 100 d20s, you would have a 7.96% chance of getting exactly 50 successes. If you rolled 1000 d20s, you would a 2.52% chance of getting exactly 500 successes. And so on and so forth.
Yada yada blah blah. No doubt, that earlier draw of 45 is skewed as hell. But 45 is also a small number. When in doubt, do another draw and make the draw bigger. And even though we're dealing with discrete rather than continuous numbers (as you can't roll a 3.5), it just makes sense to me to think of a series of rolls from 1-20 as being normally distributed, where individual events circle around a given mean.
I have kind of twisted my brain up in knots at this point, but I hope that makes some semblance of sense.
Honestly, my recommendation to visualize this would be to just roll 100 d20s 10 times. Each batch will be random, and it's unlikely that any of them will have exact averages of 10.5 (i.e. a sum of 1050). In fact, it's possible that you could see sum values ranging from 100 to 2000, though both of those are significantly less likely than anything closer to sums of 1050.
Of course, it's the average that you care about. So whatever values you get, divide by 100 and see how close you get to 10.5. Over the ten sets of 100, you'll get variations around 10.5, but they should generally vary around 10.5 instead of being stuck high or low. I'll start.
So averages of 9.7, 10.29, 10.81, 10.37, 10.93, 11.03, 10.15, 9.78, 10.66, & 9.46. The average of all 1000 numbers is 10.218, with a standard deviation of 5.77. That's really close to the normal distribution.
Yes, I only have 465 rolls of 11-20 and 535 rolls of 1-10. We're not looking for individual events, though, but rather overall trends.
If we were looking at only the first 45, it'd be an average of 9.67 and a standard deviation of 6.06. In fact, you could find 45 1s (60 actually) in the set of 1000. It's easy--tempting even--to zoom in on a run that doesn't go in your favor and assume that you're cursed. But this looks pretty normal to me.
Ugh, I need to review stats, since I was never had much of a head for them.
Which is not what I started out to say. I've been drafted this weekend to help my Mum finish up a move, so I'll check in when I can, but posting may be a bit sporadic.
Don't worry, I'll stop the stats talk.
Good luck helping your mom!
Oh, by all means, carry on! It's just...
"[The Poisson distribution.] I haven't heard that name in a very long time..."
[ooc]*Thousand-yard stare.* With apologies to Obi Wan. :)
Like I said, I need to review stats again. I was never a very math-y girl, and stats were definitely not my strong point.
Meneas looks to his companions. "Lady, sir, I ask this of you. Do you know anything about recent events concerning your fellow fey? We have encountered a number of strange events that seem to have origins in the First World - or at least, in some of its inhabitants."
I mean, probably. We heard that they were in trouble, so we came to help. I sort of forget the original motivations.
I believe that our dual magisters suggested we ask them about this "future queen" that we heard some things about.
Yes, that! A very good idea.
I believe that our dual magisters suggested we ask them about this "future queen" that we heard some things about.
“There can only be o-"
Hey, just checking in, y'all! Hope everyone is doing well ^_^
Rackal's not posted for awhile in my game with her, so I'm hoping she's alright.
Ditto, hoping everyone's ok! I'm alright: mental health hasn't been ideal lately, but it's fine. :/
The plight of the current constellation of generations: almost none of us are doing mentally well! And that is why I game with y'all.
And checking in on the check in. For some reason the latest set of posts here didn't show up as new for me. How's everyone?
Existing. Putting around forward to smacking around a fop.
Doing okay, and hoping Rackal's alright... but I haven't heard from her in a few weeks.
This makes me really sad. This was my first campaign here on these boards and I have loved bringing this story to life. I have also loved the direction that Rackal has taken it.
What do you all think? Should we try to see if someone will take up the torch? Call it? Something else?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’m willing to let it lie fallow for a bit longer, if that’s alright with everyone, in case Rackal’s been tied up with something more or less awful for a while and still needs some time for X, Y, or Z.
Maybe after Lughnasadh?
I was going to send a PM, but it seems that feature’s been disabled on her profile, so!
Rackal, if you see this, having been delayed by whatever, I hope we haven’t scared you off! I hope you can update us when you have a moment, but no pressure. Feel free to vent if doing so to friendly internet randos you’ve been throwing electronic dice with for a few years would help, and thanks so much for putting so much in to run a wonderful game for us.
<3
-Q.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would rather wait a while longer as well. Sometimes momentum matters and a period of inactivity will kill off a game, but I think with us that's not the case. We can wait for a good thing.
All sorts of weird things happen. We don't know if the game is intentionally paused or not. I also hope Rackal could get an update to us so we know whether things are okay or not.
I totally get Brental's wish to keep the game going, my very first game is also the hill I've chosen to die on if need be. I will take any chance that I find to keep it going until the end. In fact, Brental is now our third GM in that game. :)
But, with more games and several years under my belt, I've also seen situations where the OG DM has really done something special, and a replacement GM can't bring the magic. It can be sadder than just ending things sometimes. I'm not saying 'no' to continuing this campaign if Racket wouldn't be running it. But I think it would really take the right person.
Anyway, I hope you're well Rackal and can drop us a line sometime soon. We'd all like to be assured you're okay, and it's fine if you're done with the game regardless of the reason. Thank you for taking us this far, it's been really special.
I'm in agreement with Signy - we can definitely wait a bit longer, and I wouldn't want to continue without the right GM, so to speak.
And like Signy, I hope you're doing well, Rackal.
Great! If nothing else, we can maintain connections here and say hi now and then while we wait and hope.
Hey y'all. I had two thoughts. Let me know if you'd be interested in either of these ideas:
1) Moving past the current scene and flashing either forward or back to a place and time of less story import. Basically, we could decide on a scene together and just play it out GM-less. Lina and I posed several different scenes in the year of kingdom building posts (re-linked here for convenience). So if we wanted to flesh any of those scenes out to see what they were like, there's plenty of material to work with. Or if we want to stay current and just assume that we get the information we need from Tiressia, we could move back to Limen and just have some low-stakes scenes where we don't necessarily solve existing problems, but instead handle other stuff.
The goal of this would be to just continue developing these characters and their relationships with each other.
2) Having a side story with side/alternate characters. We could stick with the genre/themes of our story but take a spin with other people. For instance, a year and a half ago we half-heartedly joked about alternate undead versions of our party terrorizing the River Kingdoms. At the time, we had Lina as a banshee, Brental as a siabrae, Meneas as a Dullahan, and Signy as a ghost. A high-powered undead story could keep us occupied for a bit, though it would probably require a different thread.
We could also have Veil and Vodnykel meet up with two other animals or fey and have a Redwall-style jaunt.
The goal of these would be more to just keep gaming together with similar themes.
Oh, that sounds neat. I'm not sure I'm in a condition to make any decisions in that regard, but I'm open to any of those things. xD
Hmm. Could be neat! It’s getting up to a busy time of year for me, though, so I’m not sure I can quite commit yet.
Unlike Lina or Rackal, I don’ think I’m up to bottling lightning (that DC 25 Alchemy check!), so I’m not sure about skipping around a bit while we hit pause, but I do like the idea of a side story, if that can work out.
How do folks feel about PFS stuff? Like I said, I can’t promise anything right now, but I could try running something for folks outside my family-and-closest-friends circle, maybe? I span up the old ‘Adventure Finder’ for things set in the River Kingdoms, and there are a few PFS scenarios.
Some ideas:
1) Has anyone tried the ‘Quests’ line? There’s the “Silverhex Chronicles,” which would take some finessing to work up into a bit more of a road trip around Lake Encarthan, I gather, but might work with some time to flesh things out a bit more.
2) PFS 5-06: Davy Crockett and the River Pirates!
3) PFS 7-02: Apparently infamous for a tricky puzzle, but with an interesting setting and spooky fey forests and such?
Any of those would mean either absolute baby 1st-level adventurers or all but, but that might work. If anyone’s suffered through Neverwinter Nights 2 on their computer (I’m being a bit mean, but it landed pretty solidly in the uncanny valley for me, which didn’t do other corners cut any favours), one of the bits I really did enjoy has the protagonist try to nurture (or not) a group of helpless noobs. Maybe we could try something with a group of adventurous Helikians assembled from our main characters’ protégés/courtiers/assorted hangers-on?
Alternatively, for something wildly different, a dungeon-crawl like the Emerald Spire, or gonzo weird ‘science’-fantasy a few rivers over in Numeria?
(As an aside, I have nowhere near enough time to either learn PF2 or convert stuff to PF1 for the foreseeable future, but I am very intrigued by the Gatewalkers AP, which sounds like a natural for something Lina and Brental would send agents to look into. Alas.)
Oh yeah, I'm definitely not planning to commit to anything yet--just soliciting interest!
PFS can be very fun. Here's what I found in the River Kingdoms:
I did play Six Seconds to Midnight several years ago, and it was a lot of fun. I do vaguely remember the puzzle, though I don't remember if our GM modified it to be more feasible/provide additional clues or ran it as-written.
But yeah, any of those could be fine side-stories to tide us over. PFS scenarios and quests can go very quickly.
I could be up for something like this if it's not right away. I'm not sure what kind of theme I'd prefer, probably the one that takes the rules finagling.
An idea that's similar to some of the ones already suggested is a setup that was used for a RotRL campaign I was in. All the characters were members of the town watch. It was fun while it lasted.
Combined with PFS scenarios it could almost be like a 'case of the week' series. The low level deputies take up the (supposedly?) more mundane and simple problems while our characters are off doing the big important stuff.
I started off playing PSF before I found PbP here, and the PSF group at the games store down the street shut down over something so trivial and dumb I can't even remember what it might have been.
Of those River Kingdoms scenarios the only one I've played is The Silverhex Chronicles, but that was so long ago I don't remember a thing about it.
Really there a lot of scenarios set elsewhere that are essentially setting neutral. Only the slightest tweaking like changing names of places would be needed to relocate them.
EDIT: A more radical idea. What about a completely different game? Has anyone ever played any Call of Cthulhu? There are quite a few short, standalone scenarios for it. I think the Pulp Cthulhu version of the rules might be my favorite game of them all. The pulp rules cut back on all the characters dying all the time, though there's still plenty of dying. It's not a game for people who don't like dead characters all over the place.