Interesting read.

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/dice/

That is kind of interesting, in an abstract way.

You might write to him and ask him if you can post it as a file under Settlers.

That is sweet!

Update:
I just walked over to the local office supply store and picked up some rub-on numbers, applied them to some blank dice I had sitting around and sealed them with Future floor finish (which is a clear acrylic paint). Then a fine red Sharpie adds the dots. Very nice little DIY upgrade. I still have to find a blank d10 though.

What a trip! Neat... That was a cool thing to read through.

This hurts my head on a Friday afternoon...kudos to the author for such a thorough treatise.

very cool..I am definitely going to make a pair for my settlers kit. I also like how the red dotes kind of match the theme of the disc as well.

Wow, great read. I tempted to buy a couple of blank D6s and number em like that. Then I can be a super elitist gamer. Pfft...you add your dice together?

It'd also be neat to get a bunch of D10s of various colors and number them so that a different number is missing on each of em. Then use em to make roll and move games interesting again. Don't want to land on boardwalk? No problem! Gotta move at least three spaces! No problem!

In the end, I think I would rather just reroll the dice...

:D

I know Simon (the author of that article) personally, from when I lived in Cambridge. He's a nice bloke, but some of the stuff that goes on in his head baffles me

I've invited him to participate...

Timothy

Hey cool he's the PuTTY guy!

I think that's about the most interesting, elegant article I've read in a long time. Very creative. Amazing solution to a variant game design problem.

Yes, he is.

I certainly admire the determination and creativity.

Can I make a counterproposal though...

Roll two dice, a D5 and a D6. If the total is 7 or higher, add +1 to the D5 value. I think this provides the same result and is a little simpler.

Basically, my solution is taking the middle diagonal out of the 6x6 matrix and 'squishing' it into a 5x6 matrix. Then if you end up 'below' the diagonal, the +1 expands the matrix back.

Dave

I agree. That said, this really is a fascinating read.

Cool article.

But this is so much more elegant. Part of me wishes that there were a way to have one set of dice that you could read in two different ways, one of which gives you the proper probabilities for "no 7's", and one which gives you standard 2d6. Unfortunately I'm pretty sure such would require 180 possible outcomes, which is past the point of being worthwhile. (That's assuming that these dice still are worthwhile. ) But meh. Swapping the d5 without 7 for the d6 with would be easy enough.

This is a lovely article. Thanks for bringing it to our (my) attention.

1) It is really clearly written. A pleasure to read.
2) It is an entertaining foray into mental mathematical/spatial gymnastics. Reminds me of Martin Gardner.
3) It's the kind of thing I wish I had time for
4) It let's me drag my wife over, point to this, and say, "see, I'm not as bad as I might be!"

That was an interesting article. It seems like a lot of work for the "2 rounds" per game that it would come into play.

I would argue that the robber has a larger unbalancing effect on the game at the mid-point rather than the beginning. I wonder if these players will ever advance any heavier than Settlers if they can't even get through a few potential rolls of no resource production without having to change the rules.

Can someone please explain what the "PuTTY guy" is?

There are still a few of us (the Efficiently Encoded Minority) who can be as productive with text-based interfaces as we can with graphical user interfaces. Mr. Tatham took his claymation horse into a surreal world on the other side of the VT100 screen, and wrested an outstanding SSH client for us from the clutches of the evil blockheads. For which we will be eternally grateful.

Dave

In other words... just Google it.

I got a message from Simon:



Timothy