**Posts:**1076**Joined:**Tue Sep 30, 2014 2:34 pm**Location:**Manchester, UK

Indeed. It does 2 DP 5 times out of 6 and the rest of the time it does 0.

For the Disintegrator, it has the highest probability of doing 0-3 damage with the most likely result being 1.67, which in the real world is 2DP.

In terms of practicality it works out pretty much the same.

I understand the tools you're using to predict likely results and:

A) In this case it was not needed and seemed to me a way to "baffle with science" to win an (Fairly pointless and thread disrupting) argument.

B) 1.7 is as good as 2 when we're dealing with 6 sided dice where integers are of no real practical relevance. Perhaps the argument could be made that over the course of 6 turns that 0.34 may stack up but I doubt it does to any measurable practical effect, given the nature of probability and low sample sizes.

C) Whilst it is a low chance to do 4-6 damage with a Disintegrator it has more of a chance than a partical lance, which has 0.00 chance. A much higher chance than the light broadside straw man doing 12 damage that I had thrown at me earlier but still a fairly low chance. I understand that and thought I'd made it pretty clear that was the case.

So, now we all know that stats are useful but have their limitations and that I was right about the relative damage dealing performance of a 2+ Granite and an Emerald, could we please get back to the broader discussion?

For the Disintegrator, it has the highest probability of doing 0-3 damage with the most likely result being 1.67, which in the real world is 2DP.

In terms of practicality it works out pretty much the same.

I understand the tools you're using to predict likely results and:

A) In this case it was not needed and seemed to me a way to "baffle with science" to win an (Fairly pointless and thread disrupting) argument.

B) 1.7 is as good as 2 when we're dealing with 6 sided dice where integers are of no real practical relevance. Perhaps the argument could be made that over the course of 6 turns that 0.34 may stack up but I doubt it does to any measurable practical effect, given the nature of probability and low sample sizes.

C) Whilst it is a low chance to do 4-6 damage with a Disintegrator it has more of a chance than a partical lance, which has 0.00 chance. A much higher chance than the light broadside straw man doing 12 damage that I had thrown at me earlier but still a fairly low chance. I understand that and thought I'd made it pretty clear that was the case.

So, now we all know that stats are useful but have their limitations and that I was right about the relative damage dealing performance of a 2+ Granite and an Emerald, could we please get back to the broader discussion?