Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is a pretty simple question. Apparently dice with square edges and painted dots roll 1's a certain percentage less frequently than a standard chessex/gw block, would using the "better" dice be considered cheating/illegal in anyway?

Ive heard of this, but (from what ive thought about) its physically impossible for that to happen. So id say go for it.
Even if it is true, still go for it. The percentage cant be enought to really matter in game.

Jollydevil wrote:Ive heard of this, but (from what ive thought about) its physically impossible for that to happen.

My friend and I were thinking about it and we came to the conclusion that the cut out holes in the die make certain sides of the D6 heavier or lighter than the others, thus making some rolls (such as 1s) more common than other numbers.

Only if they use certain dice for one thing, and other dice for another. Such as rolling non-casino dice for moral checks because they roll lower, while using casino dice for everything else.

Oops.

I meant ti shouldnt matter.

You want to roll high for armor saves, yet you want to roll low for tests.

so i guess it evens out?

Jollydevil wrote:Ive heard of this, but (from what ive thought about) its physically impossible for that to happen.

Why would you think that?

Surfboard66 wrote:

Jollydevil wrote:Ive heard of this, but (from what ive thought about) its physically impossible for that to happen.

My friend and I were thinking about it and we came to the conclusion that the cut out holes in the die make certain sides of the D6 heavier or lighter than the others, thus making some rolls (such as 1s) more common than other numbers.

If that were true, the side with the "1" would be the heaviest, thus more 6's would pop up.

I looked this up once myself due to someone i played with did the certain dice for certain things scam on me.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=do+dice+with+square+edges+roll+better

I've always been a big fan of both players using the same set of dice. It's just easier in games where it really matters to someone. That way, there is absolutely no complaining, and the game itself isn't really impacted in any serious fashion.



Edit: I can't spell or type with proper grammar today...

What ever you want. If someone won't play with you because of dice, they are probably some one you don't want to be around.

Lormax wrote:

Surfboard66 wrote:

Jollydevil wrote:Ive heard of this, but (from what ive thought about) its physically impossible for that to happen.

My friend and I were thinking about it and we came to the conclusion that the cut out holes in the die make certain sides of the D6 heavier or lighter than the others, thus making some rolls (such as 1s) more common than other numbers.

If that were true, the side with the "1" would be the heaviest, thus more 6's would pop up.

That is the common thought, but it is wrong. http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/That%27s_How_I_Roll_-_A_Scientific_Analysis_of_Dice

Part of me thinks the difference would be too minute to really notice. To me, dice are dice, and I wouldn't be bothered if my opponent used massive novelty dice and rolled them on the floor or some such nonsense.

Actually, come to think of it, that would be pretty awesome.

a 13% increase to roll 1's isn't too minute to notice IMO.

I agree that you should use the same dice for every roll in a game, not special dice for your ld rolls and other for your armor saves.

I also say that both players should be using the same type of dice(both Chessex or both Casino etc) so that the game is truly balanced regardless of if people believe the article I posted.

The precision dice you are referring to only roll better because they roll more truly random.

It would be the height of poor sportsmanship to consider someone using PROPER dice to be cheating. Get your own set of real dice if you feel "cheated".

If anything, using dice that don't roll truly random would be cheating.

Battle Ready Studios wrote:The precision dice you are referring to only roll better because they roll more truly random.

It would be the height of poor sportsmanship to consider someone using PROPER dice to be cheating. Get your own set of real dice if you feel "cheated".

If anything, using dice that don't roll truly random would be cheating.

However, using TRUELY random dice for only CERTAIN rolls would be cheating. Now that isn't to say that they can't use casino dice for ALL their rolls(it would be pricey but doable).

At the same time though. If a person came up to me to play and said he'd be using only casino dice. I'd ask him if he'd let me use them as well so that the results in the game are even so I don't roll 1's 29% of the time while he rolls them 16.6% of the time. Fair IS what you are looking for isn't it?

So like I said, either both players use Chessex/GW dice and both accept the 13% increase in rolling 1's(which means less 6's) or both players use Casino grade dice and accept the 16.6% chance for any number to roll.

EDIT i was wrong

Or, you could use the same cheap bricks of Chessex dice everyone uses and keep things fair that way. But I think it's obvious to most people here that "fair" isn't really what concerns you, it's trying to win through any means possible and attempting to justify giving yourself an advantage by using specialty dice not meant for wargaming so no one can call you out on it.

I also question how "truly random" your casino dice are going to be when they're being rolled on a wargaming surface anyway. Casino dice were meant to be cast across an even surface, and don't you usually have to bounce them, too? Not only are tables covered in sand and hills that are going to affect the rolls, but you're probably not going to have a large wall or other surface to make them bounce after their cast. That's probably why they roll "better" for gaming, you're not rolling them right.

In any case I guess it doesn't matter as long as both players use the same dice. But judging from Battle Ready's attitude I don't think he's the type who's going to keep an extra set of expensive dice around to keep things "fair", it's more like "I paid for better rolls, if you don't like it get your own, lolz."

Holy crap, 29% ones ?!
And they dare sell those as "dice" ?
The matter is not "casino dice are better than GW dice", it's more like "GW dice give you fething twice as many ones as they should".

Even if both players use the same dice (which I consider a given), it's not the same if one is fielding terminators and the other a horde...

OT : I call shenanigans on your sig Sidstyler.

Hyd wrote:OT : I call shenanigans on your sig Sidstyler.

I'm sorry? What "shenanigans"?

Hyd wrote:Holy crap, 29% ones ?!
And they dare sell those as "dice" ?
The matter is not "casino dice are better than GW dice", it's more like "GW dice give you fething twice as many ones as they should".

Because if some random guy on the internet says he did a test and it's true, then obviously...

Even if it were true (he has credentials so it must be right, lol...not that I mean to keep discrediting the work put into the article, but I don't like how some guy rolls dice 1,000 times and everyone buys it as gospel), I don't see how it's as big of a deal as you make it out to be. Your example is also kind of silly because hordes are going to be affected more than terminators ANYWAY by virtue of having to roll more fething dice, no?

Well, why would he be lying ? At any rate, it doesn't sound far-stretched to me when someone says casinos try hard to make perfect dice while corporations prioritize quantity for economic reasons. Not blaming anyone on that, it's the way things should be.
But if the results show 29% ones compared to an expected ~16.67%, that's huge, and way beyond what I'd find acceptable.

My example was just thrown in as it's the first thing that came to my mind, but I tend to think rolling more 1's on a few 2+ would have more of an impact than more 1's on a bunch of 5+.


(So... Yeah "there's no such thing as a WAAC list" and the whole argument ? Come on, it's plain bad faith.)

I didn't say he was lying, I just want people to put things in perspective: this wasn't a documented scientific fact, it was a fun little experiment he did in his free time in a school lab. It's a neat little thing that gets his point across, but I wouldn't start holding this up as defining proof that Chessex dice are junk just because the guy is a teacher/engineer. He even stated in his article that it was his opinion and that his conclusions were only "probable."

I mean how does a layman even know if he conducted a worthwhile test? How do we know if 1,000 rolls is "enough" or not? Could he possibly have gotten more accurate results if he rolled them twice as many times?

In the end I personally just don't believe it matters either way. I'd rather focus more on building a good list than buying "better" dice if I want to win. There's also plenty of stigma attached to using "special" dice and I find it's easier to just use the Chessex dice that everyone is familiar with already (and likely also uses). They're smaller, they look better, they're cheaper...this hobby is expensive enough as it is without spending stupid amounts of money on fething dice, of all things.

In any case, if you want to use the casino dice that's up to you, you're the one paying for them. Just plan on bringing enough for your opponent to use, too, otherwise it makes it look like you're using them in "bad faith."

Also, like I said before, casino or otherwise precision dice are usually meant to be rolled off of banks. Casino tables are smooth, flat, and have banks on them, and when you roll those precision dice you're expected to cast them pretty far, at least more than a few feet anyway (sometimes you also use cups to shake the dice in). When playing wargames you just grab a big handful of dice (which are hard to shake in your hands and get a real accurate result) and usually don't throw them too far for fear of hitting models or going off the table, so most people just drop them (which isn't very accurate). Casino dice aren't going to help much there unless you go all the way and roll them correctly: shake them in a cup, get a nice, flat surface of considerable length, with a bank at the end to bounce the dice off of, to get the most truly random result possible. If not you're just wasting money for no good reason and you're probably much better off getting GameScience d6's instead.

Hyd wrote:So... Yeah, that "there's no such thing as a WAAC list" ? Come on, it's plain bad faith.

I'd suggest you drop the subject. If you're really interested in pushing this, then start another thread. I won't be participating in it, however, because this topic has literally been beaten to death and it always, always goes nowhere...hence my sig. I'm tired of "debating" it. I don't know who you are, but judging purely from like-minded people who have posted in past debates, your mind is likely already made up and an argument would serve no purpose other than as a tool to try and force your opinion down my throat, to exert your moral superiority that you seem to think you have over me because of how you play with your fething toys.

Good list-building is part of the game, and I personally think no reasonable person would consider it to be "unsporting" to play to your army's strengths and attempt to minimize its weaknesses by not taking overcosted, ineffective units. You can argue about it all you want but I'm not going to budge. You can either accept it and step up your game so you can compete with tournament players, or you can choose to play only with like-minded people who throw random crap together "just for fun" and give no thought to effectiveness or even winning the game.

Hyd wrote:My example was just thrown in as it's the first thing that came to my mind, but I tend to think rolling more 1's on a few 2+ would have more of an impact than more 1's on a bunch of 5+.

It doesn't matter what dice you use, you're going to roll 1's eventually. That's just how it goes. If it bothers you so much that you become one of those types that obsesses heavily over their dice then I'd suggest playing other games besides what GW has to offer, which are pretty infamous for being more about rolling more 6's than your opponent and less about skill or tactical play. Either that or find a way to avoid a situation where your small squad of 2+ guys has a real chance of being overrun by a huge blob of 5+ guys. Tanks usually help, especially against armies like Orks who don't have much reliable anti-tank anyway. Personally I don't really give a gak if Chessex dice statistically roll more 1's than they "should", dice are dice.

The basic concept of dice is that they generate random numbers to resolve game situations.

If you know or believe that your dice are not generating random numbers, clearly you are cheating if you select the biased dice to roll in situations where it will benefit you.

If you knowingly use dice that have a bias in them for different purposes then yes, that is cheating.

Do people forget why we throw dice in a game? It's to add a random element. Dice, whenever possible, should be random and unbiased. Any attempt to manipulate the result of a die roll instead of respecting the random purpose of the die is not playing the game fairly. Die rolls are supposed to be the unpredictable element in a game. Trying to take the randomness out is not a fair way to play the game.

Now obviously dice can have a bias but most of the time we are not aware what it is, or which dice in our collection they are likely to be. But if you are aware if a bias in the dice, and then select dice accordingly to make high or low rolls, how is that anything other than cheating?

For the record I keep all my gakky Chessex dice mixed up in a black dice bag. When I need to use them I grab a handful out of the bag to keep on the table and only check to make sure I have enough different colors to represent different weapons/models shooting. White for missiles, blue for plasma, ivory and dark blue for my commander who usually has a better BS, etc.

But like I tried to say above, most of us probably "cheat" anyway and just don't realize it. You're not going to get very good, random rolls if you just cup your dice in your hands and cast them a few inches onto the uneven table. People aren't putting much thought into how they're rolling them, they're worrying more about the dice themselves thinking that if they spend tons of money it'll make it all better.

I would find it a bit iffy if someone was using one set for low rolls and another set for high roles, but would only call them out if it became blatantly obvious.

Tournaments in my local FLGS say you have to use one set of 36 chessex dice per game and put them on the table for you in a rolling tray, simple.

Using dice as close to perfectly random as possible is an advantage if common dice roll worse (as seems to be the case).

It's a long way from cheating though.

The red measuring sticks GW put in starter packs used to be too short (mould shrinkage). Is using a correct length tape measure an advantage? Yes. Is it cheating? No.

What about dice towers? (those things where you drop the dice in the top, they clatter about a bit and then fall into a tray so you can read the results)

Using precision dice in those would be pretty random and fair. You could even use casino dice in them if you built your own, made it a bit bigger and covered the inside in felt.

Surfboard66 wrote:This is a pretty simple question. Apparently dice with square edges and painted dots roll 1's a certain percentage less frequently than a standard chessex/gw block, would using the "better" dice be considered cheating/illegal in anyway?

I disagree with your premise... (the article was flawed that yielded these results).

My opinion is the only "illeagal" practice involved in choosing which dice to use, is if a person intentionally uses certain dice for some rolls but not others on a consistent basis. I'm not talking lucky dice... I'm referring to "leadership test" dice that roll low, "armor save" dice that roll high, etc. They don't have to be loaded, the person can just have figured out over time which ones are skewed which way.

That, to me, is illeagal.

I don't understand why people think that others shouldn't be allowed Casino dice? It's not an unfair advantage, they are available for everyone to purchase. Why should I not be allowed to use my Casino dice if someone else hasn't saved up their money to purchase a set?

Now I'm not a jerk. I would allow someone to use my dice if they asked, same as I would allow someone to use my tape measure. I saw the article and went out and purchased myself a set of Casino dice. The only real reason I can see someone not being allowed Casino dice is because sometimes the sharper edges can damage terrain and tables, so I bring along a box to roll into.

Pundabaya wrote:What about dice towers? (those things where you drop the dice in the top, they clatter about a bit and then fall into a tray so you can read the results)

Yep. The closer to truly random the better. For real ingenuity check out this self-loading dice tower!


I think he needs to bounce the dice around a bit more but very cool.