PFS Policies on Tablets at the Table


GM Discussion

1 to 50 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Dear Mods: This is PFS-relevant because table variation is the issue at hand; please don't move this to the Technology board. Thank you!

All: Now that Hero Lab has hit the iPad, I know that I personally will be playing pretty much exclusively off my tablet. I also know I am not the only person who was eagerly awaiting this release for that very reason.

So, we've had a few go-rounds on this before, but now that the app is out there, it's no longer theoretical: From this point forward, a lot of gamers are going to want to do everything from their tablet.

How do you plan to handle this at your tables?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Me personally: As long as their heads are in the game and doesn't slow the table down, I don't care what players have in front of them.


Is this about PFS policies or about individual GM policies? Your title and your post content are at odds.

Sczarni 4/5 RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I don't think it makes a difference. PFS doesn't require you to use their official paper character sheet, so why should it matter if you are using an electronic one?

I personally never bring paper books to game sessions anymore -- they're too heavy! Having all of the (purchased & watermarked) PDFs on my iPad has been a huge boon for me, and has allowed me to attend games I would not otherwise have gone to. Plus, it's faster to look up rules than paper (once you get the hang of it).

Anyway, I'm excited to use the new app, and as long as it functions well and is stable, it should be a nice addition!

That said, I know some GMs have personal issues with electronics at the table. Your mileage may vary; expect table variation.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

We have four or five players (including my VL) that use tablets or laptops at the table for their character sheets. It doesn't bother me, personally, as a GM. If something seems off, I still ask to see it (but have them hold the electronic device for me), and if I suspect fudging of HP or whatever, I could easily keep track myself. Do note that this hasn't happened yet -- and could just as easily happen with pencil and paper.

Aside from character sheets, digital medium is quickly becoming the "new wave" of the future. It's a lot easier to have my 100+ pathfinder .pdfs on my Nexus than in my backpack. With the slick watermark feature, I see no reason for any issue. They just need to have it with them (the tablet or .pdf) and be able to show me the physical page. HeroLab or other Apps don't count.

But yeah, show me a character sheet (any character sheet), your chronicle sheets (or digital scans), and your books (or purchased .pdfs) and you can play at my table.

Word of warning: always double check HeroLab characters - especially before a con. It's a program written by men (and women), and we're fallable.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The iPad version should be less of a table blocker than a laptop so I welcome that. As long as they don't mind passing me the tablet to review the character sheet if needed.

I still do not allow dice rolling aps from tablets / phones. I cannot verify the accuracy of them and technically the core rulebook asks you to "roll" a dice, so I am just following the rules.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Walter Sheppard wrote:
It's a program written by men (and women), and we're fallable.

Speak for yourself. :P

Scarab Sages

I'll be testing this weekend. I would also not be surprised if I had players in the game I'm running also do this. It should be less awkward than the laptops some players are already using.

That said, I'll still have my binder and a few hard copy books available. I've found looking up rules in a hard copy CRB is much faster than on the Ipad.

The Exchange 5/5

Patrick Harris @ SD wrote:

Dear Mods: This is PFS-relevant because table variation is the issue at hand; please don't move this to the Technology board. Thank you!

All: Now that Hero Lab has hit the iPad, I know that I personally will be playing pretty much exclusively off my tablet. I also know I am not the only person who was eagerly awaiting this release for that very reason.

So, we've had a few go-rounds on this before, but now that the app is out there, it's no longer theoretical: From this point forward, a lot of gamers are going to want to do everything from their tablet.

How do you plan to handle this at your tables?

ah... there are some things I would rather you didn't do from your tablet while I'm at the table. ;)

As a judge? I personally have no problem with most anything.

As a player? I would like to recieve a paper chronicle.


I would have no problem with players using the sheet to bring in their characters. I actually will be trying it myself this Friday for my game.

However, chronicle sheets will still need to be carried on paper anyway (unless you scan them all in I suppose, and then YMMV again on acceptability) so I will have paper backups most of the time. At least for now.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I agree with the ban of dice rollers in games. It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table. If you're playing on PBP forums or some other digital medium... well, I guess you take what you can for that kind of play. I'm sure they're very accurate.

But we can all agree that dice a more fun.

Gamers have stories about their dice, they give them names, that have favorite dice for this or that. Even put them in special bags if they do good or bad. We have a player that has a bag called the Dice Gulag, where he sends dice to be punished. There's a shattered d4 in there that serves 'as a warning to the others.'

You can't get that with an app.


Walter Sheppard wrote:
It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table.

Though, I do wonder if the lack of "true randomness" in a dice-roller program is any less than the lack of "true randomness" in most plastic dice. Even if that software engineer scoffed at a program being able to produce truly random numbers, such a program (just like our imperfect dice) is probably more than close enough to random for gaming purposes. :)

That said, though I use my iPad for all of my character sheets, I don't think I'm yet comfortable with letting players roll dice on their tablets, but that's mostly due to (probably unfounded) concerns about intentionally-hacked die-rolling software.


On top of that, the new HeroLab app omits quite a few items that would prevent me from getting rid of dice.

for example, I just imported my characters and tried out my ninja. It applied most if not all my bonuses right. I could roll weapon damage from it, but it has no option to roll sneak attack dice. So even if I wanted to, I could not replace physical dice with the app (Id have to combine with another app, but then that's even more stuff to have loaded and keeping track of.

So, character sheet is going on my iPad for now, but my dice are (and probably always will be) on me.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I plan to handle this the same as always: I've never had a problem with tablets at the table, so go for it. In terms of character sheets I prefer paper, as -I- don't want to be responsible for your tablet, so if your character sheet is on your tablet, you're gonna hold it while I look at it. And I would only accept a pdf character sheet, not a herolab file. I haven't looked at the new herolab app yet so whether or not I would accept it will depend on what it looks like.

Also, people named Patrick don't get to use dice towers at my table. ;)

5/5

I have been playing from my tablet (windows 8, so running desktop Hero Lab) for quite a while now without any issues or complaints from GMs. I do always have my paper character sheet, chronicles, and resources for unusual abilities/spells handy, but prefer to play off the tablet. As a GM I have no problem with any player doing the same, though if they cannot produce chronicles or resources I will balk.


So to answer the OP's question, No there is not PFS policy about tablets at tables.

/dust off hands

That was easy!

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

However you bring your character sheet, you still need to bring your actual Chronicle sheets to the table, of course.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

Mike Mistele wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table.
Though, I do wonder if the lack of "true randomness" in a dice-roller program is any less than the lack of "true randomness" in most plastic dice.

Here's what I remember from the discussion and more of why I vote plastic over electronic. If nothing else, at least the information is pretty neat.

So he explained that randomness cannot exist within the system, it has to be programmed to simulate randomness. So if you want a program to come up with 20 different values, you first enter in those values. Then you use an algorithm to select one of those 20 variables. That algorithm pulls information from various variables that exist within the machine or system. A common example is time. Because time changes, we can use it to simulate randomness.

So, in a very basic example, if the millisecond of the internal clock is X, then the outcome is Y. If it is 1:00:01 the outcome is 1, if it is 1:00:02 the outcome is 2, etc. That means that if a programmer, or savvy tech person, or whoever knew the exact algorithm used to generate the outcome, they could generate -- theoretically -- whatever outcome value they wanted to each time.

That said, these formulas are usually far more complex than just "if the time is X then the outcome is Y," but even so -- it can be manipulated to generate a specific outcome. The same can happen with physical dice too. You can hold a d20 in your hand a certain way, and then "drop it" rather than "roll it" and by doing so consistently get specific outcomes, rather than more "random ones." The difference between those two examples is that in one, I can clearly see a person manipulating the physical system (by not rolling); in the other, I can't clearly identify if a person is abusing a system.

Thus, my reluctance.

EDIT: Length, clarity.


Katie Sommer wrote:

I plan to handle this the same as always: I've never had a problem with tablets at the table, so go for it. In terms of character sheets I prefer paper, as -I- don't want to be responsible for your tablet, so if your character sheet is on your tablet, you're gonna hold it while I look at it. And I would only accept a pdf character sheet, not a herolab file. I haven't looked at the new herolab app yet so whether or not I would accept it will depend on what it looks like.

Also, people named Patrick don't get to use dice towers at my table. ;)

Oddly specific, but fair enough. (I've actually stopped carrying it around--damn thing is just too heavy.)


In truth, it's simply easier for a programmer to generate numbers from 1 to 21 and then display the results of 20 and 21 as "20". Done. Loaded dice in two or three lines of code.

Anyone can write and release an app to any of the various app stores. That's why I wouldn't allow smartphone dice rollers.


I don't think we are going to get a PFS specific ruling from the powers that be, simply put because they haven't made one in the past on this kind of issue. They are going to leave it up to the GMs and coordinators as to how they are going to run things for their specific tables.


Walter Sheppard wrote:

Here's what I remember from the discussion and more of why I vote plastic over electronic. If nothing else, at least the information is pretty neat.

So he explained that randomness cannot exist within the system, it has to be programmed to simulate randomness. So if you want a program to come up with 20 different values, you first enter in those values. Then you use an algorithm to select one of those 20 variables. That algorithm pulls information from various variables that exist within the machine or system. A common example is time. Because time changes, we can use it to simulate randomness.

So, in a very basic example, if the millisecond of the internal clock is X, then the outcome is Y. If it is 1:00:01 the outcome is 1, if it is 1:00:02 the outcome is 2, etc. That means that if a programmer, or savvy tech person, or whoever knew the exact algorithm used to generate the outcome, they could generate -- theoretically -- whatever outcome value they wanted to each time.

That said, these formulas are usually far more complex than just "if the time is X then the outcome is Y," but even so -- it can be manipulated to generate a specific outcome. The same can happen with physical dice too. You can hold a d20 in your hand a certain way, and then "drop it" rather than "roll it" and by doing so consistently get specific outcomes, rather than more "random ones." The difference between those two examples is that in one, I can clearly see a person manipulating the physical system (by not rolling); in the other, I can't clearly identify if a person is abusing a system.

Thus, my...

Well, no, you're basically completely wrong on which is easier to fake at this point.

On the one hand, while it's true the algorithm can be manipulated, in most cases at this point the 'seed' used to generate the starting number is no longer taken from time, but from variations in the power source at start-up time. This is extremely difficult to control, and can be defeated by asking the person to start the program in front of you.

On the other hand, a dedicated cheater rolling dice? No. You are not going to be able to detect them just by watching. You have too much to do while running the game, and there are entire books written on this topic, along with expensive classes and ample practice opportunity. The reason why this would be so well understood is simple - gambling. People wanting to cheat the casinos at dice need to be able to fool someone whose sole job is to watch them roll dice from every conceivable angle, over and over again. Probably on replay. The methods will, obviously, be geared for d6s as a result, but it wouldn't take much to re-work for d20s.


I guess my question is this: What's the difference between a player using herolab on their tablet vs their laptop vs a character sheet print out from herolab on their home computer? Nothing....Play on!

Though you may still want to keep a print out in your back pocket in case the GM wants to look at your character and isn't familiar with herolab. In the end it is the players responsibility to provide the GM with what they need.

Edit: Let's not get into the argument of dice vs computer rollers. Neither is perfect. The algorithm isn't purely random and all your dice are egg shaped anyway (if you don't believe me take a micrometer to them). Neither is purely random.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

Chris Kenney wrote:


Well, no, you're basically completely wrong on which is easier to fake at this point.

Stuff.

Good to know. Guess I'll just have to keep trusting my players then ;)

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Northwest aka WalterGM

Lab_Rat wrote:

I guess my question is this: What's the difference between a player using herolab on their tablet vs their laptop vs a character sheet print out from herolab on their home computer? Nothing....Play on!

Though you may still want to keep a print out in your back pocket in case the GM wants to look at your character and isn't familiar with herolab. In the end it is the players responsibility to provide the GM with what they need.

Edit: Let's not get into the argument of dice vs computer rollers. Neither is perfect. The algorithm isn't purely random and all your dice are egg shaped anyway (if you don't believe me take a micrometer to them). Neither is purely random.

Well, almost all your dice :P

And I don't think there was a debate as to which was "more random," but "more obvious to notice a cheater with." At least, that's what I was on... >.>


Yes...those are game science dice. I have 3 complete sets of them. Their not perfect but they are better than anyone else. The only issue I have is keeping them inked and reading the gem (see through) versions.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Walter Sheppard wrote:
I agree with the ban of dice rollers in games. It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table.

I work creating and running randomized clinical trials used to have medical devices (often used for implanting in human subjects) approved and made available for the market. A key component of said trials is that you need to randomize subjects to a treatment or control arm of the trial. This is done under the prevue of the FDA which is primarily responsible for making sure that those devices are safe for human use. I am intimately aware of the "limitations" of computerized randomizations as we use them regularly to randomize the subjects for said trials.

If it's good enough for the FDA, it's good enough for the game table.


Walter Sheppard wrote:


Well, almost all your dice :P

Yeah, Lou Zocchi and GameScience have been selling their "high precision" dice for the 30+ years that I've been playing D&D. :-)


MisterSlanky wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
I agree with the ban of dice rollers in games. It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table.

I work creating and running randomized clinical trials used to have medical devices (often used for implanting in human subjects) approved and made available for the market. A key component of said trials is that you need to randomize subjects to a treatment or control arm of the trial. This is done under the prevue of the FDA which is primarily responsible for making sure that those devices are safe for human use. I am intimately aware of the "limitations" of computerized randomizations as we use them regularly to randomize the subjects for said trials.

If it's good enough for the FDA, it's good enough for the game table.

Oh, I'm actually certain that computer generated random numbers (with the right algorithms and sources of entropy) are actually more random than gaming dice, GameScience "precision" (which are biased against 14 because of the sprue nipple) or not. Maybe not casino dice, but certainly tabletop gaming dice.

But like I said, you have no way of knowing who wrote that dice rolling program on that fruit phone. Even if there were an "official" dice rolling app from some well known company, you could be looking at a well made copy-cat app.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I have three outstanding rules about technology at my tables:

1) As long as you have your chronicles in paper, and your dice are not electric, then it's fine. If I need to see something, I will ask and look over your shoulder. Don't like that, then print your sheets out.

2) I also ask that all my players do not hide their rolls behind their technology. As I roll in the open, I hate it when players roll dice behind their tablets/laptops. It can borderline cheating and I hate cheaters.

3) As long as they are not seriously distracting I am also all good as well. Music sometimes is awesome, but when videos start playing and cause chaos, well, then there can be a problem..

Those are my three rules.

Silver Crusade 5/5

As a physicist, I can tell you that computers are generally able to generate random numbers that are far more random than a roll of a plastic die.

With plastic dice, we're neatly in the realm of classical mechanics where things work deterministically. If you know the position, speed, rotation etc. of the die right after it's rolled, as well as the properties of the surfaces it bounces off, you can, in principle, compute exactly the results of the roll beforehand.

Computers are often able to use thermal noise as a source of randomness. This is true randomness of nature, with its origin in the weirdness of quantum mechanics. In practice, what they tend to do is use a "true" random number to initialize a pseudorandom number generator, then use numbers from that generator (the randomness properties of the generators themselves are a subject of hundreds of scientific papers; the long story short is that the modern ones are very good).

In practice, though, randomness comes down to unpredictability, and both methods are quite unpredictable enough. So it's a matter of which tend to be fairer and how verifiable the fairness is. Unless a die is so grossly miscast that you can actually see it's not symmetric, you would have to resort to roll testing to figure out if the die is fair. Detecting subtle bias (such as rolling 20 10% more than usual) would require way too much rolling and statistical work to fit in a gaming session. The same goes for a computer, except it might be able to give you a million rolls in a second or so, so you could actually do the analysis if you're so inclined. Furthermore, because dice are mechanical things, I would expect them to have unintentional biases far more often than computers.

tl;dr: If you really, really want properly random numbers, use a computer instead of a die. Dice are a nice tradition and social convention, though, because nothing quite excites roll-players like the sound of them rolling around and coming up as 1/20...


Walter Sheppard wrote:
Mike Mistele wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table.
Though, I do wonder if the lack of "true randomness" in a dice-roller program is any less than the lack of "true randomness" in most plastic dice.

Here's what I remember from the discussion and more of why I vote plastic over electronic. If nothing else, at least the information is pretty neat.

So he explained that randomness cannot exist within the system, it has to be programmed to simulate randomness. So if you want a program to come up with 20 different values, you first enter in those values. Then you use an algorithm to select one of those 20 variables. That algorithm pulls information from various variables that exist within the machine or system. A common example is time. Because time changes, we can use it to simulate randomness.

So, in a very basic example, if the millisecond of the internal clock is X, then the outcome is Y. If it is 1:00:01 the outcome is 1, if it is 1:00:02 the outcome is 2, etc. That means that if a programmer, or savvy tech person, or whoever knew the exact algorithm used to generate the outcome, they could generate -- theoretically -- whatever outcome value they wanted to each time.

That said, these formulas are usually far more complex than just "if the time is X then the outcome is Y," but even so -- it can be manipulated to generate a specific outcome. The same can happen with physical dice too. You can hold a d20 in your hand a certain way, and then "drop it" rather than "roll it" and by doing so consistently get specific outcomes, rather than more "random ones." The difference between those two examples is that in one, I can clearly see a person manipulating the physical system (by not rolling); in the other, I can't clearly identify if a person is abusing a system.

Thus, my...

Interesting... I would have thought that the issue had to do with simulating average outcomes. For instance, if you keep rolling 2d6, you'll find that 16.67 percent of the rolls will come up o 7. However, that is different from the odds of what number between 2 and 14 will come up each time you roll. The odds for any result are actually the same, despite the average. To simulate the average, however, it seems to me you must "tell" the compute what numbers to come up with most, thus eliminating actual randomness. In other words, telling the computer to run averages over time to simulate randomness, rather than it randomly selecting a result each time based on the same odds, as with real dice.

Does that sound crazy?


Bruunwald wrote:

Interesting... I would have thought that the issue had to do with simulating average outcomes. For instance, if you keep rolling 2d6, you'll find that 16.67 percent of the rolls will come up o 7. However, that is different from the odds of what number between 2 and 14 will come up each time you roll. The odds for any result are actually the same, despite the average. To simulate the average, however, it seems to me you must "tell" the compute what numbers to come up with most, thus eliminating actual randomness. In other words, telling the computer to run averages over time to simulate randomness, rather than it randomly selecting a result each time based on the same odds, as with real dice.

Does that sound crazy?

It would be crazy, but it isn't. You simply generate two random numbers from 1-6 and add them together and you get the same result with the correct distribution.

Grand Lodge

Tablet: Fine
Scanned chronicles: Fine
Dice Roller: Not fine

Sovereign Court 5/5 Venture-Captain, West Virginia—Charleston aka Netopalis

My concern with cheating regarding dice rollers is twofold. First, it is possible to edit apps to change the outcome of the rolls, something which I would be unable to detect. Second, even without that, it doesn't prevent the old "re-roll until you like the result" trick. A player can sit there hitting the roll button until they get a high but not suspiciously high number, and unlike with real dice, I can't tell that they've done this. While it could be avoided by asking people to hit the roll button while I'm watching, that feels like it's slower than rolling dice and also feels like a bit of a jerk thing to do.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Netopalis wrote:
A player can sit there hitting the roll button until they get a high but not suspiciously high number, and unlike with real dice, I can't tell that they've done this. While it could be avoided by asking people to hit the roll button while I'm watching, that feels like it's slower than rolling dice and also feels like a bit of a jerk thing to do.

This is basically my problem with it. I see no distinction between someone insisting they are honest about their die rolls, but that they want to roll on their tablet, and someone insisting they are honest about their die rolls, but wanting to roll behind their hand/book/anywhere else I cant see.

If you are insisting that I can trust you to not cheat, yet refuse to roll in the open where everyone can see your rolls, chances are that you are up to something.

2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My opinions:

Laptops: Ok, as long as they are not creating real estate problems for other players (i.e. a 17" Alienware behemoth is not welcome)
Tablets: Better than laptops and smart phones*.
eCharacter Sheets: Fine with me.
Chronicles: Prefer they are in paper, but scanned copies are ok.
Dice rolling programs: No- I know how easily they can be manipulated.

*I #$%^ing cannot stand it when players are texting, playing game apps, or otherwise messing around on their cellphones at a table. I had a case of this just this last weekend. I think this falls into the "as long as they have their head in the game" category. Can't stand having to re-explain everything to these distracted players over and over again- it's burdensome to everyone at the table.

Liberty's Edge

Good points Whiskey Jack. As a player, we must all resist the urge to text, e-mail and allow ourselves to be distracted.

In our games where we skyped in players (Home campaign and PFS) I allow them to roll dice and just tell me what they got. They tend to point the camera at the dice as they roll it, but it is not necessary. I trust the player until they give me a reason not to trust them.


Personally, I'm almost completely with Whiskey Jack. I think I've allowed some dude with a dice rolling program before at a con, but he asked me beforehand if I was cool with it and it just wasn't a big deal. But true randomness or no, I vastly prefer real dice.

Personally, I keep all my books on my tablet, but I tend to run all my characters from paper (with the exception of my level 15). I try and keep a word doc copy of my characters, however, as you never know when you might get into a pickup game.

My husband, on the other hand, religiously keeps everything on his tablet, including all his purchases and gold earned. He likes spreadsheets though. :-P

4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

MisterSlanky wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
I agree with the ban of dice rollers in games. It was once explained to me by an incredibly gifted software engineer how its impossible to have true randomness in programming, which is the basis I would use for disallowing them at my table.

I work creating and running randomized clinical trials used to have medical devices (often used for implanting in human subjects) approved and made available for the market. A key component of said trials is that you need to randomize subjects to a treatment or control arm of the trial. This is done under the prevue of the FDA which is primarily responsible for making sure that those devices are safe for human use. I am intimately aware of the "limitations" of computerized randomizations as we use them regularly to randomize the subjects for said trials.

If it's good enough for the FDA, it's good enough for the game table.

I know that some dice rolling programs are better than others. Can you give use a quick list of what programs are good/bad or what randomization "type" or "feature" to look for?

I'm actually more interested in getting a good dice rolling program for myself, as a GM. Being able to roll without the players even seeing/hearing the dice could be a great way to keep the surprises coming.

Sovereign Court 5/5 Venture-Captain, West Virginia—Charleston aka Netopalis

There is a major difference between a GM using a dice rolling program and a player; the GM *should* have no incentive to cheat beyond the normal fudging that occurs to make the game make sense. GMs routinely roll behind screens; the same is not said of players.

That being said, I fully support character sheets on tablet, as a side-note - my objection only pertains to dice rollers.


Having played around with Hero Lab on my iPad now in the last 24 hours, I am stoked to use this during my PFS sessions. Less table-clutter, less forgotten buffs/adjustments, instant spell knowledge, no more wet-erase marker stains on my fingers...and best of all, not making my poor inkjet printer cry for mommy all the time.

That being said, there is no way I would use the dice roller. One, I love using actual dice. Two, a few times I've managed to hit the randomizer more than once and double-rolled. I want my GM to see what I'm rolling, so while I think the rolling buttons are great, they won't see any action from me in PFS games.

The Exchange 5/5

wow... can I get a "dice rolling AP" that always rolls '10'? not 10+, just '10"? wow... able to take 10 with every roll... I think my rolling average would increase by 50%!

;)

(sorry, couldn't resist.)

Sovereign Court 5/5 Venture-Captain, West Virginia—Charleston aka Netopalis

nosig wrote:

wow... can I get a "dice rolling AP" that always rolls '10'? not 10+, just '10"? wow... able to take 10 with every roll... I think my rolling average would increase by 50%!

;)

(sorry, couldn't resist.)

The ability to take 10 on attack rolls would be a pretty huge thing. Not even kidding. Who hasn't seen a barbarian at the table getting very, very angry because he'd hit on a 7, and keeps rolling 2s and 3s?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:

wow... can I get a "dice rolling AP" that always rolls '10'? not 10+, just '10"? wow... able to take 10 with every roll... I think my rolling average would increase by 50%!

I think I saw that in the Apple App Store the other day: iTake10.

:-D

The Exchange 5/5

Mike Mistele wrote:
nosig wrote:

wow... can I get a "dice rolling AP" that always rolls '10'? not 10+, just '10"? wow... able to take 10 with every roll... I think my rolling average would increase by 50%!

I think I saw that in the Apple App Store the other day: iTake10.

:-D

O.O wow.... can I have one?

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I do kind of get puzzled looks from my VC when he runs up to the table and says "everyone roll a d20!" and I ask if I can take 10. He looks at me odd and explains we're rolling for winning a boon. So I smile and repeat..."Can I take 10?"

he let me do it a couple times, now he just says "everyone roll a d20!" and seeing me at the table he adds "No! you can't take 10!"


Forget the barbarian. Taking 10 on an attack roll would break the gunslinger.

Speaking of which, I am still looking for a set of dice that favor the mid range numbers. Lot's of 9-11's make a touch attacker happy.

The Exchange 5/5

Lab_Rat wrote:

Forget the barbarian. Taking 10 on an attack roll would break the gunslinger.

Speaking of which, I am still looking for a set of dice that favor the mid range numbers. Lot's of 9-11's make a touch attacker happy.

and he would never crit again. Think about it.

and never hit the monster that you need an '11' to hit... not miss some time or even most of the time. Never.

;)

Scarab Sages

nosig wrote:
Lab_Rat wrote:

Forget the barbarian. Taking 10 on an attack roll would break the gunslinger.

Speaking of which, I am still looking for a set of dice that favor the mid range numbers. Lot's of 9-11's make a touch attacker happy.

and he would never crit again. Think about it.

and never hit the monster that you need an '11' to hit... not miss some time or even most of the time. Never.

;)

Given my rolls for the last few games I played, I would take that trade in a heartbeat.

(I started tracking attack rolls, last scenario I only had 1 roll of 10 or higher. It did not threaten a critical.)

1 to 50 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / PFS Policies on Tablets at the Table All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.