Bardic Dave wrote:I think you’re misreading my post; I’m not suggesting that variance can help you determine the relative value of increased DPR vs improved decpetion. I’m saying that if variance can show that within a projected number of sessions a +1 bonus will not be statistically significant, you might feel more inclined to invest that +1 based solely on personal preference. This isn’t a non-sequitur, it’s my entire point.
Very easy to calculate. You need 22 d20 rolls for a +1 to be statistically significant 90% of the time, and 11 for a +2.If it's an attack roll, if we consider 2 attacks per round, and 4 rounds of combat, you have it statistically significant after 3 fights with 90% chance. So, just one session.
All the variance calculation in this thread is just plain wrong. The 5000 rolls are just a maths mistake. A +1 is very quickly significant.
By which you mean a +1 will yield a higher average result than a +0 over 22 rolls 90% of the time, correct? I think that’s pretty conclusive.
Thanks for doing the math.