|
Given Mike Brock's ruling about electronic character sheets, and specifically the reasoning behind said ruling, I have a followup question/discussion prompt.
Can a PFS GM disallow electronic die rolling programs and/or require actual dice to be used? Personally, I'd love to be allowed to do so as I have no way of knowing how rigged a die rolling program is. Rigged dice can at least be potentially spotted. Can I use the "I get to review any die roll" prerogative combined with the "I don't want to touch your device lest I break it and be responsible" out, is that kosher?
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unlike the media used for character sheets, real dice versus electronic rollers can actually impact gameplay integrity.
Also unlike the media used for character sheets, a ruling on only allowing "real" dice doesn't force anyone to do extra work or spend extra money compared to what they were doing before (even someone without dice can very easily borrow some, or buy one set once and have it last them for years, coming out to less money per session than having to reprint character sheets).
Therefore, unlike the media used for character sheets, I would be in support of (or at least not opposed to) a requirement to use physical dice.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Therefore, unlike the media used for character sheets, I would be in support of (or at least not opposed to) a requirement to use physical dice.What about blind players who use an electronic roller that vocalises the result?
What about players with paper allergies who use electronic sheets for that reason?
Any rule can have exceptions for disabilities. That should go without saying, so what point are you trying to make?
Venture-Captain, Netherlands
|
Braille dice?Therefore, unlike the media used for character sheets, I would be in support of (or at least not opposed to) a requirement to use physical dice.What about blind players who use an electronic roller that vocalises the result?
Those exist: 3D printed D20 with braille
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have four sets of dice with me, usually. Orange, Blue, Purple, and Green. Each set has one of those oversized d20s that's easy to see from across the table. I've lent them out during plenty of games.
During my spiel at the beginning of every game I ask that players roll their dice out in the open, so that everyone can get excited when they roll a 20 (and so I can get excited when they roll a 1).
Though I can't recall a time when someone preferred to use an electronic dice roller over physical dice.
|
I will strongly discourage people from using electronic dice rolling programs at my table. I feel that I as a GM have the right to say that I would not like electronic dice rollers at my table.
Every so often there are exceptions, but as a rule I dislike them, and do not want them at my table.
I have noticed that when people are using their electronic tablet/ipad / android / iphone....lap top etc with a program on it, they simply poke it and announce their result. There is no build up no anticipation to what they have rolled. In general, i have noticed these players are a little less engaged with the table.
Where as with dice, people are more interested in what their fellow players roll, especially the roll is made in the center of the table. Everybody is thrilled when someone rolls a 20, confirms a critical etc.....or groans in sympathy when someone rolls a 1 and their character fails their reflex check and misses the rope as they fall....or fail their saving throw.
So when someone shows up with an electronic dice roller and no dice. I am considerate enough to offer one of my own sets of dice which I keep just for this purpose.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Though I can't recall a time when someone preferred to use an electronic dice roller over physical dice.
It's probably because rolling your iPad around in you fingers instead of your favorite D20 while whispering "My precious" just doesn't have the same effect. Or maybe that's just me.
|
Though I can't recall a time when someone preferred to use an electronic dice roller over physical dice.It's probably because rolling your iPad around in you fingers instead of your favorite D20 while whispering "My precious" just doesn't have the same effect. Or maybe that's just me.
...it's not just you...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if a player needs to drop 20d4 .. or 20d6 or in the case of a sound Striker (10d20 and 1d8+x*10... + crits) I generally try to make an exception for electronic Dice rollers (tho I have other players witness it)
Yeah, I remember in 3.5 where I had a level 15 character who was doing over 20 dice of damage (and quite abit of static bonuses on top of that) in a round. Another player just did the rolls on his laptop and told the gm the result, rather than having us pool together all our d6s and adding them up manually.
Venture-Captain, Michigan—Mt. Pleasant
|
In a family PFS game my cousin and her husband used to use electronic dice. They started to miss actually rolling the dice and stopped using them.
I usually prefer players to use real dice and always bring several sets with me so players that forgot them or don't have them yet can borrow them. I hadn't considered having sets with oversized d20s... that's a nice idea. :D
|
|
if a player needs to drop 20d4 .. or 20d6 or in the case of a sound Striker (10d20 and 1d8+x*10... + crits) I generally try to make an exception for electronic Dice rollers (tho I have other players witness it)
As a warhammer / 40k player (before D&D actually) I can say that rolling that many dice is half the fun of such a build! I keep my dice in a rubbermaid thing with a beefy lid - I just use the lid as my dice surface to keep them from scattering to the four winds.
|
|
But if their electronic roller never rolls less than 12 or 15, then yeah, I'll ask them to use actual dice.Especially on those d6s. That's rather suspicious!
"Okay, so, I hit, let me roll 1d3 for damage....
18 points of damage."
"Umm. How are you doing that much damage on a 1d3?"
"20 Str for +5. Power Attack, wielded two-handed, for +9. +1 enhancement, Oops, +2, Magus Arcane point used previously. Oh, and a 2 on the die."
I had a 2nd/3rd edition pugilist like that. The actual damage die was an insignifigant part of the (rather large) damage total. In fact I would often offer to just take the minimum damage roll, just to be smug about it.
-j
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of our guys who has many, many attacks, damage dice, and combatmaneuvers on each attack bought one of those plastic containers with a grid of small compartments. He put color-coded dice in each "column" for the attack, damage, and CMB roll for each attack. For his full attack, he shakes up the container and slaps it onto the table, and all the stuff is right there ready to go. Works really well, and allows a GM to check math or adjustments to be made. No loose dice but all the impact of rolling.
|
But if their electronic roller never rolls less than 12 or 15, then yeah, I'll ask them to use actual dice.Especially on those d6s. That's rather suspicious!"Okay, so, I hit, let me roll 1d3 for damage....
18 points of damage."
"Umm. How are you doing that much damage on a 1d3?"
"20 Str for +5. Power Attack, wielded two-handed, for +9. +1 enhancement, Oops, +2, Magus Arcane point used previously. Oh, and a 2 on the die."
Wouldn't that be 20 STR for +7 two-handed (if you are getting the Two handed on he power attack)?
So, 20 damage on a d3. Wait, what weapon can be wielded two-handed for d3?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But if their electronic roller never rolls less than 12 or 15, then yeah, I'll ask them to use actual dice.Especially on those d6s. That's rather suspicious!"Okay, so, I hit, let me roll 1d3 for damage....
18 points of damage."
"Umm. How are you doing that much damage on a 1d3?"
"20 Str for +5. Power Attack, wielded two-handed, for +9. +1 enhancement, Oops, +2, Magus Arcane point used previously. Oh, and a 2 on the die."Wouldn't that be 20 STR for +7 two-handed (if you are getting the Two handed on he power attack)?
So, 20 damage on a d3. Wait, what weapon can be wielded two-handed for d3?
Nope, the Str damage is still just x1 when wielded two-handed, but the limitation, added to the weapon in Ultimate Equipment, only says Str damage is not modified when wielded two-handed.
And the weapon, just FYI, is the whip.
You can't wield a whip in two hands in order to apply 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier to damage rolls.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
The actual damage die was an insignificant part of the (rather large) damage total.
My wife has a halfling rogue. Two-weapon fighting with a (small) rapier and dagger means the weapon dice are a d4 and a d3. But if I've done my job, and got my monk into position to give her a flank, her sneak attack damage is quite a bit better :-) Currently she only gets two attacks with her primary weapon (and, with improved TWF, another two with the secondary). But with high DEX, the teamwork feat "Outflank", and a menacing weapon, she has a pretty good chance to hit even on the iteratives, especially if I've been able to trip our opponent. With a party including somebody capable of casting "haste" that gives her another attack at the highest bonus. At level 11 she was quite capable of doing well over 100 points of damage in a typical round, very little of which came from the weapons' damage dice.
She has enough d6s to roll separate dice for each attack. Most of those are metal dice (I mean real metal ones, not those lightweight plastic ones with a metal coating). Somehow it's a lot more satisfying to roll a large number of dice than it is to prod a button on a dice-roller app, and those metal dice make a lovely noise when they hit the table.
(Mind you, at next level she gets her third attack, and 8d6 from sneak. That means she could need 48d6 if she hit with everything. I don't believe she has quite that many - maybe she'll have to re-use some).
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I don't think we really want a definite rule here.
Alternatively how often do you check your players dice? Do the 20 have all the numbers from 1 to 20 ? Do they have hidden counterweights? Can you actually read the black on black numbers without the light shining exactly right?
Exactly the same issue.
And for those with many D6 to roll, I actually bought 20+ rather tiny D6 for the times when my magus crits ^^
EDIT: I assume that RAW doesn't actually recognize electronic dice rollers as dice.
|
|
Around here we have an irc-bot that is fairly well known and frequently used by irc and wikigamers and I'm just fine with someone using that one, but mostly because I'm familiar with it. If an unkown software would be used I would be pensive about it and at least demand to keep the screen visible while rolling. Probably would test it first myself to make sure it actually randomises rolls instead of using a scripted order etc.
I myself don't use bots even in high level games. I have all these die with me anyway. :)
And no, I believe talking to and naming your die is completely normal behaviour. Especially if you need to turn the lights off so you can witness the eldritch power glowing through the exterior shell of my gm-set.
|
|
But if their electronic roller never rolls less than 12 or 15, then yeah, I'll ask them to use actual dice.Especially on those d6s. That's rather suspicious!"Okay, so, I hit, let me roll 1d3 for damage....
18 points of damage."
"Umm. How are you doing that much damage on a 1d3?"
"20 Str for +5. Power Attack, wielded two-handed, for +9. +1 enhancement, Oops, +2, Magus Arcane point used previously. Oh, and a 2 on the die."
Yes - but he said specifically 'rolls' less than a 12 of 15. A total of 12 or 15 with a d20 including modifiers isn't very suspicious either.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to trust people and I don't think players are using electronic dice rollers to cheat.
But I have seen SO many of my apps (any game that includes some randomization) have an update that includes
- Much improved Random Number GenerationHence, no electronic dice rollers if it's avoidable.
Sure - electronic dice rollers aren't PERFECTLY random. But you think that real dice are better? Most dice are so statistically bad as to be laughable.
There's a reason that Las Vegas spends bunches of $ for perfectly machined d6s for games such as craps. (as opposed to the molded dice we use) And even then - they retire the dice pretty quickly as the act of rolling them will wear them down enough that they don't remain perfectly weighted for long.
|
|
if a player needs to drop 20d4 .. or 20d6 or in the case of a sound Striker (10d20 and 1d8+x*10... + crits) I generally try to make an exception for electronic Dice rollers (tho I have other players witness it)As a warhammer / 40k player (before D&D actually) I can say that rolling that many dice is half the fun of such a build!
I must confess, when my 13th level character cast Orb of Electricity in a recent 3.5 game, to a certain amount of joy when I picked up my entire stack of d6s to roll damage and turned to the guy next to me to ask if I could borrow 4d6 because I only had 21 with me.
|
|
Can we stop asking for rulings on things that mostly serve to upset and divide us on the forums?
** spoiler omitted **
As the original poster, feel obligated to reply directly to this comment.
I believed that the issue of using electronic dice simulators is exigent, and IMO the lively discussion thus far bears that opinion out.
Secondly, as I pointed out in the OP, there has been a recent ruling regarding electronics in PFS that didn't directly touch on dice simulators, but is close enough that (again, IMO) can be reasonably inferred to extend to dice simulators.
If I'm going to review a die roll, if it's on a pad or iphone that means scouring not only the internet for information about the rolling app but also the pad or iphone itself to verify that it hasn't been set to fudge. That's not only prohibitively time consuming, but in the case of androids and iphones beyond my skills, personally. And, I'm of the opinion, directly applicable to the spirit Mike Brock voiced as the reasoning why players using e-character sheets must also provide hard copies: liability.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I must confess, when my 13th level character cast Orb of Electricity in a recent 3.5 game, to a certain amount of joy when I picked up my entire stack of d6s to roll damage and turned to the guy next to me to ask if I could borrow 4d6 because I only had 21 with me.if a player needs to drop 20d4 .. or 20d6 or in the case of a sound Striker (10d20 and 1d8+x*10... + crits) I generally try to make an exception for electronic Dice rollers (tho I have other players witness it)As a warhammer / 40k player (before D&D actually) I can say that rolling that many dice is half the fun of such a build!
Sorry but that sounds glorious^^
I remember an old "The Dark Eye" adventure, where the trap said "collect all the dice in the room and divide the rolled damage between all players", lucky that my dice buying craze hadn't started back then^^
Can we stop asking for rulings on things that mostly serve to upset and divide us on the forums?
** spoiler omitted **
As the original poster, feel obligated to reply directly to this comment.
I believed that the issue of using electronic dice simulators is exigent, and IMO the lively discussion thus far bears that opinion out.
Secondly, as I pointed out in the OP, there has been a recent ruling regarding electronics in PFS that didn't directly touch on dice simulators, but is close enough that (again, IMO) can be reasonably inferred to extend to dice simulators.
If I'm going to review a die roll, if it's on a pad or iphone that means scouring not only the internet for information about the rolling app but also the pad or iphone itself to verify that it hasn't been set to fudge. That's not only prohibitively time consuming, but in the case of androids and iphones beyond my skills, personally. And, I'm of the opinion, directly applicable to the spirit Mike Brock voiced as the reasoning why players using e-character sheets must also provide hard copies: liability.
It think it would be reasonable for GMs to decide this on a case by case basis. I have had a player with a diagnosed condition that made math nearly impossible for him, that is a pretty clear cut case, but GMs might allow a player to use an app for something like 25 d6, but still require physical dice for attack rolls...
And the argument that a player might come to an event, only with a digital dice replacement... I dare say, that every table will have at least 1 set of dice.
|
|
I don't think anyone is advocating people with impairments to be forced to abandon devices that make their enjoyment of Pathfinder possible. In fact, I KNOW no one has been advocating that. Let's just drop that subject from now on until someone DOES say that's what should be done.
Moving on:
Personally, my problem with dice simulators is that I have no way to verify whether or not the roll is rigged in some way, whereas with physical dice I feel I at least can spot most forms of shenanigans.
Fudging Probabilities:
With real dice, you'd need a badly manufactured or a modified die (heated or shaved or etc)
With dice simulators, all you need is an app that allows you to modify its probability settings. Or to download a 'cracked' app that is otherwise known to not allow such shenanigans. Unlike a rigged die, that's impossible to spot without basically a forensic analysis of the device.
Even if you presume the players never cheat in this way, there's what I consider to be the bigger problem: modifying the roll itself
With dice, it's a matter of flopping a non-fair roll, or similar tricks. All can be spotted.
With dice simulators, it's a matter of subtly rolling over and over again until you get the roll you want, then giving a nonimpactful tap on the screen after the GM asks for a roll, and you proudly hold up your success. The GM can't spot this unless he's paying close attention to the screen 100% of the time, and a GM can't devote that attention to one player.
Maybe most players who use dice simulators wouldn't preroll their rolls. But I have no reasonable way of discerning those who would from those who wouldn't, and thus I think it's fair to treat them all equally. I'd love to be empowered to just ban dice simulators entirely*.
*= reread the first sentence of this post before replying to this specific thought.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I don't think anyone is advocating people with impairments to be forced to abandon devices that make their enjoyment of Pathfinder possible. In fact, I KNOW no one has been advocating that. Let's just drop that subject from now on until someone DOES say that's what should be done.
Moving on:
Personally, my problem with dice simulators is that I have no way to verify whether or not the roll is rigged in some way, whereas with physical dice I feel I at least can spot most forms of shenanigans.
Fudging Probabilities:
With real dice, you'd need a badly manufactured or a modified die (heated or shaved or etc)With dice simulators, all you need is an app that allows you to modify its probability settings. Or to download a 'cracked' app that is otherwise known to not allow such shenanigans. Unlike a rigged die, that's impossible to spot without basically a forensic analysis of the device.
Even if you presume the players never cheat in this way, there's what I consider to be the bigger problem: modifying the roll itself
With dice, it's a matter of flopping a non-fair roll, or similar tricks. All can be spotted.
With dice simulators, it's a matter of subtly rolling over and over again until you get the roll you want, then giving a nonimpactful tap on the screen after the GM asks for a roll, and you proudly hold up your success. The GM can't spot this unless he's paying close attention to the screen 100% of the time, and a GM can't devote that attention to one player.
Maybe most players who use dice simulators wouldn't preroll their rolls. But I have no reasonable way of discerning those who would from those who wouldn't, and thus I think it's fair to treat them all equally. I'd love to be empowered to just ban dice simulators entirely*.
*= reread the first sentence of this post before replying to this specific thought.
Repeating my last paragraph:
I think it would be reasonable for GMs to decide this on a case by case basis. I have had a player with a diagnosed condition that made math nearly impossible for him, that is a pretty clear cut case, but GMs might allow a player to use an app for something like 25 d6, but still require physical dice for attack rolls...
And the argument that a player might come to an event, only with a digital dice replacement... I dare say, that every table will have at least 1 set of dice.
--------
In other words I am perfectly fine with giving each GM to power to deal with that situation on his or her table, on a case by cases basis. A ban or blessing would not make the situation better, and something like "GMs can decide not to allow electronic dice rollers on their table" would solve the situation quite neatly.
I'm not a big fan of those 'ring-dice' either. Reminds me of a spinner from kids board games 40 years ago, eventually after enough wear would spin to the same spot much of the time.
At least electronic dice can come with a cache. Dice rings don't, making them super suspicious.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I'm not a big fan of those 'ring-dice' either. Reminds me of a spinner from kids board games 40 years ago, eventually after enough wear would spin to the same spot much of the time.
I actually own a dice ring from the Kickstarter, and frankly they have problems. The indicator can stop right between two numbers and the way that you roll them, it seems quite possible for the player to be the only one capable to read the result.
I see it more as a geek gimmick/ identifier.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Reminds me of a spinner from kids board games 40 years ago......I see it more as a geek gimmick/ identifier.
Or one of those cereal box decoder rings that the Hardy Boys sponsored.
|
|
If the organizer and the GM can't resolve this themselves, then you probably don't want that GM to run for you.
Or you, the GM, probably don't want to run games for that organiser.
Players should not be looking at the GM's dice. If the organiser feels that the GM is fudging or ignoring dice results to the extent that it detracts from the game, and an adult conversation has been had about it without resolution, then, yes, there may not be enough trust or respect left in the relationship for it to be healthy for the GM to continue. (Maybe I've misunderstood and there is some physical issue, such as loud noise or furniture damage from metal or stone dice?)
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
My only concern is that I have a good friend who plays and GMs, but he's blind. I don't want PFS to be unwelcoming to him because he can't use his phone based game aids at a table.
No one here suggested that your blind friend should not be able to use such an app (even though the brail dice seem awesome) and if a GM gives you grief for wanting to use it... run, don't walk, away... nothing good can come from that session.