tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post7561204332133661212..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: Let's Talk About Semantics & Other ThingsAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-38915862412953947122014-03-16T00:01:20.493-06:002014-03-16T00:01:20.493-06:00What helped me understand the Monty Haul problem w...What helped me understand the Monty Haul problem was to greatly increase the number of "doors" involved. Here's a thought experiment that represents the same phenomenon on a slightly larger scale:<br /><br />Imagine I pull out one of those single-page year-at-a-glance calendars and offer you $1000 if you correctly guess my birthday. You take a wild guess that it's March 10. I then cross out every day of the year, except for March 10 and July 27. Now I tell you that, in fact, my birthday is one of those two days, and I give you the chance to change your guess from March 10 to July 27.Silbermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03634048670337733047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-84177360065833022952014-03-15T14:45:38.022-06:002014-03-15T14:45:38.022-06:00I am totally with you on source material.
Somewha...I am totally with you on source material.<br /><br />Somewhat deliberately, I took a year in university where almost every class involved epic literature. Beowulf, Gilgamesh, Odysseus, Aeneas were all characters I spent a fair bit of time pondering and considering. These sorts of heroes are nuanced, deep and fascinating, and so much <i>more</i> than the goofballs that appear in modules. Creative work is so widely available and in such enormous quantity that you really don't need to go very far to find ideas to steal or develop.<br /><br />Almost everything I have ever written was influenced by whatever I last read. We cannot help but be affected by the content we consume; it opens us up to new ideas and new ways to explore the world.<br /><br />Some things do this better than others. Modules surely rank lower on the scale than something that's so central to the human condition that it has survived for centuries. Modules will not survive for centuries. Their design is inherently flawed: it's a poorly made amalgam of tropes and, as you so delightfully put it, the "masturbatory part" of the railroad and mood. It does not convey any human message; it simply sits on a shelf and costs an absurd amount of money.<br /><br />The greatest thing I learned from this blog is to ignore my own "notions" about how the world is supposed to go, and instead work alongside the players. D&D is so much better when treated like improv, and the most important rule of improv, absolutely and without question, is <b>support your partner</b>. Source material can come from the DM, but we have half a dozen other people all around us who also have bold, bright ideas from their own collection of experiences. With that much potential, why would you ever chain yourself to one author's railroading module?Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03496502173819113887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-15831878006070593732014-03-14T17:20:55.867-06:002014-03-14T17:20:55.867-06:00I think it does. Thank you both. I spent a bunch...I think it does. Thank you both. I spent a bunch of time on the commute home tearing it apart, and I think I <i>almost</i> have it.<br /><br />What's interesting about the Monty Hall problem, for me, is that I know without a doubt that I'm wrong, because people much smarter than me have agreed that this is true; so I have to accept that I am wrong <i>on faith</i> ... which I always have. It is one of the things I trust myself about, and I think is also that quality in me that proves I'm not a 'know it all.' I know when I don't know, even if I don't know why I don't know.<br /><br />This settles the issue regarding accusations against me that argue that I don't care about opinions; of course I care about opinions. Just not everyone's. And it should also settle the issue that my statement Tuesday brought up, about only wanting to talk to people who share my point of view; my point of view is that argument is constructive, not destructive, when presented without pride. The two of you disagree with me and there's no problem in the discussion at all.<br /><br />Both of you have a good weekend.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-60227953096916546542014-03-14T16:51:55.022-06:002014-03-14T16:51:55.022-06:00The Monty hall problem comes down to this. If you ...The Monty hall problem comes down to this. If you did not pick the car at first, switching ALWAYS gives you the car. If you picked the car at first, switching always fails. Not picking the car is a 2/3 chance, while picking the car is 1/3. The weight of probability says you probably didn't get the car the first time, so switching will give you the car.<br /><br />Hope that helps.Giordanistihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18375496443176258588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-57982789298985141382014-03-14T16:30:17.358-06:002014-03-14T16:30:17.358-06:00To be fair, the assumption in the Monte Hall probl...To be fair, the assumption in the Monte Hall problem is that he always shows you one wrong door. The whole problem falls apart without that assumption.<br /><br />It isn't bullshit, but proving it would require running thousands of simulations, which would eventually prove the problem to be accurately stated.<br /><br />21 (the movie) always made me smile. The actual MIT teams didn't allow white kids because white college kids didn't spend hundreds and thousands of dollars gambling, and it would have been too suspicious (at least according to Jeffrey Ma in the book). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-78391515184001768772014-03-14T15:04:37.092-06:002014-03-14T15:04:37.092-06:00Yes, I've seen the Wikipedia page, I've se...Yes, I've seen the Wikipedia page, I've seen the movie 21, I've seen many explanations of it.<br /><br />My problem with the statement, "... if you switch to Door #3, your odds of winning at this point are 1/2 ..." is that in fact, my odds of winning were increased to 1/2 ANYWAY, no matter which door I pick after the fact. BOTH doors after the revealed flop, both 1 and 3, have 50% chance of winning, whether I change or not. The flop HAS increased the chance that door number 3 will be the right door, true, but it has ALSO increased the chance that door number 1 is the right door.<br /><br />So no, still makes no sense to me.<br /><br />I think it has to have something to do with there being a goat, a washing machine and a car. If I pick the car, then obviously Monty is going to show me the washing machine. If I pick the washing machine, he is going to show me the goat. He's not going to show me the car. And again, if I pick the goat, then he's again going to show me the washing machine. Somehow, what he shows, based on what I've picked, has to be the reason why I should change doors. There's a 2/3rds chance he's going to show me the goat, and a 1/3 chance he's going to show me the washing machine. IF he shows me the washing machine, I should DEFINITELY change, because I've obviously picked the goat.<br /><br />Now THAT makes sense. But this other stuff sounds like bullshit to me.<br />Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-7393094822405956402014-03-14T14:38:23.208-06:002014-03-14T14:38:23.208-06:00You can always hit up Craigslist or a local art sc...You can always hit up Craigslist or a local art school. I know about 4-5 artists fresh out of SVA (School of Visual Arts, in New York) who specialize in fantasy illustrations, but I am a terrible art evaluator and their talent and work ethic is all over the map.<br /><br />I recently tried to explain the "Monty Hall problem" to my wife, and she sort of understood it. The best way I can describe it is thusly: the odds of an event occurring are set at the time you make the choice, because the odds at the onset inherently incorporate the possibilities of both success and failure.<br /><br />In a larger sense, using the described problem, when you pick Door #1, you have a 1/3 chance of winning. When Monty Hall shows you Door #2 is a flop, your odds of winning never changed because there were always 2 wrong doors, and your choice was made when you didn't have the information that Door #2 was a flop. However, if you switch to Door #3, your odds of winning at this point are 1/2, and thus you have increased your odds of winning by 16.6667%. <br /><br />Hopefully that helped, probably not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-15044511542362896802014-03-14T12:30:20.842-06:002014-03-14T12:30:20.842-06:00I'm fine with a image-free product if it's...I'm fine with a image-free product if it's something I want to read. A good cover is a plus, but I usually skip images on reading material.<br /><br />However, I'm fan of art books, so when I want to see good art, I want a large amount of it. ;-)Marcelo Paschoalinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05869301766211022548noreply@blogger.com