Topic: Do big dice roll better?

[*Nosferatu*]

Now, I've heard from several people at the local Games Workshop that the small little dice from chessex and the standard GW don't roll so well because of their size and what not. Basically claiming that the holes drilled into them messes with the center of gravity just so slightly forcing smaller dice to roll in favor of the lower numbers.

Now, I believe that this is all psychological because statistically, the discrepancies are negligible. And that all this is more or less complete bull.

However, I bought some big gun dice for complete different reasons.

I want to roll giant dice for those dramatic moments.

No seriously.

I'm not trying to justify my insecurities.

Not whatsoever...

[Wuestenfux]

I can't tell, but now I play with casino dices. They are far more fair than these tiny ones.

[Hija]

If you are throwing a die and you pick it up and it does not roll much then you are probably effecting the roll and something like a dice-tower may be the answer.  If, however, you pick up 10 dice and throw them I think the contact between dice will mitigate any design flaws.

The Chessex dice are extremely light and the mass of holes is extremely small, I think with an average roll where the dice roll at least one foot you will have very little effect from any design flaws.

If you are bored try rolling 1, 2, 10 die by dropping or by rolling one foot.  Maybe do that a 1000 times and count the results :-)

I myself use a dice-cup, give it a good shake and let it spill out from about 15cm.  I am happy with the randomness.

I do not like big dice as they can cause damage, and often hit terrain or land on the floor, and have more chance of being "cocked".

Casino dice are big, and also sharp.  A potentially dangerous combination.  Rolling 20 Casino dice may wear out your skin!

I think the main thing to watch if your opponent is "looking lucky" is the setting of dice, i.e. setting them to a position on the table or in the hand, and giving the dice no more than 1 or 2 side movements, I have seen cheats like this (a good friend who only cared about winning if he could cheat to win!  I still beat his ass 9 times out of 10).

[Xeal]

Hand rolling is a pain because you can't do out to stop it, ecept institute a dice cup.

Weighted dice are funny, especially if you plan in advance against that person, there a great little thing called leadership tests.  Just find ways to force as many leadership tests and pinning tests as possible, then sit back and laugh as your opponent fails one after the other. Another good tactic is forget your own dice and bring lots of weapons that deny him an armour save, add in lines like "Wow, I can't believe all 6 attacks hit and wounded, thats six of your guys dead with no save, talk about unlucky" and my other favorite "Oh My GOd I can't believe it, as if I just made all 8 of my 5+ invunrable saves, the dice gods must be on my side"

getting back to big dice, they don't role any better, if anything because of the size I find them harder to role if you have more than 4 or 5 of them at once.  One the other hand plaing miniture bowling is always good for a laugh, STRIKE!

[Lorizael]

There is a certain satisfaction in rolling those biiiig apocolypse dice.

Personally I use dice form wickeddice.co.uk because they look cool. They get lots of comments too.

[Pinball]

Yeah, I believe the difference is insignificant. But if it wasn't you'd have it backwards:
Let's take the 1-6 axis on the dice (as opposed to the 2-5 axis and the 3-4 axis) as our example.
If the weight of the missing pips mattered the roll would be skewed in the roller's favor. The 1 side is missing 1/6 as much material as the 6 side. This makes the 1 side heavier. The 1 wants to land on the bottom, and the 6 (being lighter) wants to land on top.
But as you said Nosferatu: "And that all this is more or less complete bull."

[Gwaihir]

I read an interesting thread on the general topic of dice over at warseer about 6 months or so ago.  A guy there is some sort of a professor and actually had his university class rolling dice in a controlled setting to see if the rolls matched the stats.  He did hundreds of test rolls and had various ways to control for anomolies and the like.

Anyway his conclusion was that dice with rounded edges/corners like the chessex dice come up with a result of one far more often than they should.  It was nearly twice as likely that a one would result than it should have been.  The dice without rounded edges/corners were much closer to where there should be statistically.

The one problem I saw with his methodology was that each test involved one die rolling by itself.  I suspect that rolling multiple dice together will tend to counter the effects he got since the individual die will be prevented from rolling over to the 1 side up because of other dice being in the way.

[Mad Dok Brown]

Personally Im very superstitious about my dice and I have used everything from GW dice in the tin to the Battle for Skull Pass set dice to chessex; each smaller than the first. The largest of the dice are very clumsy and heavy, the rolls are generally low for me and theres a good chance to take out a couple models from a stray die. BfSP ones with sharp corners are a bit random with more bouncing than rolling. I do agree that the chessex are more reliable with the ability to replicate rolls much easier, although that does take the fun out of the game when it turns into a Dicehammer match (I usually lose those)

[small_furry_spider]

I am personally curious why 1 would be the most common outcome as the dice centre of gravity is closest to the 1 face (as pointed out by pinball). The only way I could see it being biased to roll ones would be if the holes were filled in with some material and this was significantly heavier that the die material.

Being nearly twice as likely to roll 1s would be very noticeable too as that is a massive shift and should be relatively easy to test for (take a mug, one die and roll it in the mug 60-ish times, we would expect ~10 ones, but according to this would get ~17 ones).

The sharp corners of the dice tend to make the roll a more chaotic bounce instead of a roll which will make it more random. Similarly, rolling lots of the together would also increase the randomness.

[Gornak]

From what I've seen the really really small dice roll the best. And if you are rolling badly there is three reasons why:

1. Have you made the required sacrifice to the dice gods?
2. Have you displeased the dice gods in anyway?
3. your opponent is cursing your dice rolls.

[Xeal]

Arn't you supposed to be able to create your own rigged GW Dice, by putting them in a microwave with the 6 side facing up and microwaving them for a minute (or maybe it was putting them in the grill and grilling them for a minute)

[nurgle5]

I don't think big dice roll better, my inquisitorial dice love nothing more than landing on a one(or a =I= in this case). For me dice roll better when i pick them up without looking .

[Kaledesh]

i wouldnt think that the size would matter i mean i use chessex dice and they roll really great sometimes and bad other times and the same for guys i see usin big friggin dice

of course it is fun to use giant dice to annoy your opponent

and for reel fun...two words...fuzzy dice

[The Voivod]

sounds like a job fo the mythbusters.  
They allready did something similar with buttered toast.

[*Nosferatu*]

Actually ironically I think by Big dice roll worse. 

[Lord of Winter and War]

I have some of those 'Pirates of the Spanish main' dice. They are stupidly small, and they roll very, very bad. I've not had the opportunity to roll my Apocalypse dice yet, though vehicle destruction dice tend to roll well.

[Revolver]

I've taken to using big rubber dice recently, and it's true, they do roll better!

[MisterMetal]

I read an interesting thread on the general topic of dice over at warseer about 6 months or so ago.  A guy there is some sort of a professor and actually had his university class rolling dice in a controlled setting to see if the rolls matched the stats.  He did hundreds of test rolls and had various ways to control for anomolies and the like.

Anyway his conclusion was that dice with rounded edges/corners like the chessex dice come up with a result of one far more often than they should.  It was nearly twice as likely that a one would result than it should have been.  The dice without rounded edges/corners were much closer to where there should be statistically.

The one problem I saw with his methodology was that each test involved one die rolling by itself.  I suspect that rolling multiple dice together will tend to counter the effects he got since the individual die will be prevented from rolling over to the 1 side up because of other dice being in the way.

This is wrong as the rolls would have to be the exact same under the same conditions everytime, the force the angle of release, the angle of impact, the exact spot the dice land on and where they hit the table, humidity, air pressure and the force of gravity to the specific area you are in would all effect the dice, you would have to make these all the same every time to get a true roll.

Havening 50 students roll the dice and count the amount of times they get a number is not a test.

Its like flipping a coin, sure you have a 50/50 chance of getting heads, but that if you got tails your first flip it doesnt mean your getting a heads for the second flip.

50% chance for heads to come up could be 1 flip out of 1
50% chance for heads to come up  could be 1 flip out of 2
50% chance for heads to come up  could be 1 flip out of 200

The odds say its number two, and the more flips we do the closer to the actual amount me we get, but as humans we have a need to try and control and explain what we dont have control over, so someone could say this US Quarter flips bad, im using a Canadian Quarter or a New Zealand 50 cent piece.

There is no effect on the size of the dice, unless the dice have been altered in some way to control the roll. Its all in their heads.

[*Nosferatu*]

There is no effect on the size of the dice, unless the dice have been altered in some way to control the roll. Its all in their heads.

Yeah, that's what I gather. Though I don't have the heart tell them all that. 

[Gwaihir]

This is wrong as the rolls would have to be the exact same under the same conditions everytime, the force the angle of release, the angle of impact, the exact spot the dice land on and where they hit the table, humidity, air pressure and the force of gravity to the specific area you are in would all effect the dice, you would have to make these all the same every time to get a true roll.

Havening 50 students roll the dice and count the amount of times they get a number is not a test.

I gave a very simplified version of what the guy did.  Though I don't remember everything that he controlled when making the test, he did make efforts to control much of the info.  I don't remeber all the particulars though.  Maybe I can dig up the link when I get some time.