I've often seen people comment that they "get bad rolls", and use it as an explanation why they lose all their games.

Just want to point out that this concept is ridiculous.

If you genuinely think that's why you're losing, you should share dice with your opponent, and then revise your stratagems.

You could be a superior strategists or have a better team, but luck is a variable you cannot count on. I think it is part of what makes the game so interesting. Even if you are sharing dice if you have bad luck it will just make your rolls bad.

Have you ever had a heated battle come down to two figures left, each nearing death, and as you roll your final hit to win... crit miss, off of invulnerability, your opponent's 2 damage is now enough to kill you. That was obviously just bad planning on your part, you should have rolled the dice to the RIGHT instead of left.

It's ridiculous that dice don't always roll the same way? Well in that case, I shall endeavor to point this out to my dice nice time they come up as double ones.

it doesnt matter how sound your strategy is if most of your attack rolls are to low to hit anything

If I roll 3's and 4's all game, then yeah I am going to credit my loss to bad rolls. However, if I let my opponent knock my figures onto bad attack values, or my opponent brings high defense values that I didn't prepare for, I am not going to blame my loss on bad rolls if I am rolling 6's and 7's and still cannot hit.

You are just as likely to roll a 12 as you are a 2.

Might I recommend the following work, which I used as the core reference for my Masters level thesis in Meta-Ethics:

Luck: The Brilliant Randomness of Everyday Life, by Nicholas Rescher
http://www.amazon.com/Luck-Brilliant...1464024&sr=8-1

The core argument of the book is that, although luck might not exist within a determinist metaphysical system, the very nature of human interaction causes us to perceive luck as a factor in our lives; our inability to reach the level of Laplace's demon and understand the complete nature of causality forces us to accept luck as a guiding force in human behavior.

Sure, but if I roll two 2's this game, and two 12's next game, which game do you think I'm going to do better at?

I'm talking about games (plural). I've heard my friend say "I always lose because I get bad rolls".

Don't really have the heart to say "No, you just make awful decisions ingame". So unleashing my annoyance here

This is absolutely true. It doesn't change the fact that if I don't roll above a 5 all game (and that has happened to me before), then I will blame luck rather than strategy. I can only do so much if I can't hit folks with 16 defense or higher.


Is there more behind this thread, or are you just taking the stance that bad luck doesn't determine the outcome of games? I'm not entirely sure how to respond.


Edit: Nevermind, now you've answered just what I was wondeirng about.

This is wholly interesting. Pushes all my buttons as a spiritual agnostic.

Perfect dice don't care about past results. Some games just by nature of probability will give you low rolls.

Amora please elaborate your point if you're serious but my opinion is you're a subtle troll.

Also it's not just perceived luck, with documentation some games will just be lower rolls.

Hell in Clix there are many critical moments, and a bad roll can punish you for the rest of the game, regardless of strategy though risk vs reward also comes into play.

Fair enough.

The guy who won Worlds a couple of years ago, and then designed the Nightcrawler we all have learned to loathe, used to be the judge at my local venue. He couldn't roll higher than a 5 to save his life, so he made a lot of tactical decisions under the assumption that he was going to fail all of his rolls. Seems to have worked out well for him.

If you play assuming that you're always going to roll that 9, you're probably not going to do too well in the long run.

What's your point? I never claimed otherwise. You said it was ridiculous for people to complain about bad rolls. I pointed out that bad rolls do, in fact, occur.

Now we're talking. Saying that one always loses because of bad rolls is a case of someone not accepting that they made mistakes. (Or the person is a walking statistical improbability.)
However, you really did not make this clear in your opening post.

I'm sorry for wasting your time. I'm sorry for having something to add that's outside of "Nightcrawler is so broken!". I'm sorry that you find it necessary to implicitly elevate yourself above someone else, because you disapprove that they reject completely arbitrary etiquette.

Maybe I'm a troll today. What of it?