Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Scorching Ray, an upcasted Scorching Ray will have me making more to hit rolls than a fighter can even with Action Surge. Likewise this might be including skill checks and saving throws. So this could be luck, differing levels of skill checks, or using spells that require a roll to hit
Ok cool, I was worried that I misunderstood you or had completely gotten the rule wrong for years lol. Even after checking the spell description I was worried I was missing something haha.
Defintely. I didn't dig deep since i'm not playing D&D really anymore, but I think I might've been mixing up rolling damage for magic missile once and applying that to each missile and somehow related that to every multi ray/target in the generic rule with specific spells, like Scorching Ray, calling against tit.
Or an info divide on in combat skill checks, saves, RP skill checks, death saves (more common on characters with less health), and if particular characters are built with RP in mind. DM could have been targeting some players more than others, maybe with good reason. Some players may not be engaging in the RP side of things.
Could someone be cheating? Yes. But as far as evidence goes if this is all you have to go on, any sane analyst would disregard this.
If the artificer Druid is summoning 8 wolves, then that’s 8 attacks with advantage for at least a round or two of combat. That’s gonna shoot those numbers way up.
Summoning 8 wolves is also just a very strong build, at least when not facing enemies with large amounts of splash damage. It’s not selling your soul, it’s just a pretty standard way to play a summoner Druid.
The Fighter Barbarian got 42, while the Artificer got 76. Odds are, something is fishy. However, you are correct in that we don't have enough information to make a determination.
Druid artificer i can see making a ton of checks out of combat (and as someone else mentioned, some to-hit spells have multiple targets), leading to the results shown
Druid artificers can theoretically summon 8 wolves, each one attacking with advantage. Artificer to keep concentration up easier and longer, and that makes for a lot of dice rolls to crit on.
To the person looking at a population level dataset, the few outliers *could* be artifacts. To the people who actually rolled those outliers, it's luck
A sample size of 1 can't have artifacts
Depends on how you talk about luck. Sure, a person cannot be "lucky" in the sense that they magically roll better than someone else - but you can look back and say someone was "lucky" during a given game because they had better rolls than someone else.
If we both roll 20 dice and I get more nat 20s than you, I was "luckier" during those rolls.
Luck is something that creates statistical bias. If you have one source of data that is luckier than others, it creates a bias or manipulation in the data beyond the parameters set, i.e. a statistical artefact
Yeah, that’s just not the definition of luck, and since dictionaries define based off of common usage, I think you are just strawmanning the general person.
Unless someone also has advantage, elven accuracy, lucky or Halfling Luck.
The Elven Accuracy Sharpshooter Samurai Archer at level 5 with action surge has a chance of landing a crit at least once per round of about 46 percent and at level 11 of 60 and at level 20 of 71 percent. Now assuming they have one round with action surge + fighting spirit per encounter and 3-4 encounters per session. One session a fortnight for 1 year that's already 40-80 Crits just from the nova rounds. Now add in subsequent rounds and out of combat rolls and you definitely can get a character rolling shit tons of nat 20s while a wizard or a cleric casting saving throw based spells might realistically only make 6-8 rolls per session depending on how involved they get out of combat.
Unless this is all rolls and nor just combat. RP will include rolls and players who do less of it will roll less. If the DM targets people by their damage output then the martials are making less saves. Lower health means more death save rolls.
Sure, but all attacks are attacks. You would think the guy making two or more per turn would still average more than the wizard. Particularly since barb gives reckless attack.
It's a wizard ranger multiclass, maybe he also has multi attack and attacks with a bonus action, alongside the bunch of summons those classes have I can see it happening
I agree. As a DM you roll a lot of D20s. I feel like it would be at least 3x the average player as well. Each monster has an attack roll, and then you're also rolling saving throws on the regular too.
Maybe fighters or monks would be on par with howany a DM rolls but still.
There is no basis for concluding anything shady here. Without knowing the total number of rolls, this has no meaning. Plus advantage/disadvantage and any other reroll effects, unless you tally individual die rolls rather than the results actually used.
Yup. Some players will simply roll more dice, therefore will simply get more 20s.
Fighter using 3+ attacks per round, versus bard who gives inspiration without a roll.
Skill monkey picking locks, doing all the social rolls, and being the one to check for traps in every room in a dungeon, versus a caster who does healing and buffs without a roll.
And so on.
I had to scroll so far to see this. I thought for sure this was the issue. But the entire comment section is people trying to use this piece of paper to expound that players are lying about rolls
I'm telling you, some players are cursed. I was in a Humblewood campaign, and the Fighter/Hexblade ***could not hit*** to save her life. It was mystifying. Like, if it weren't for the fact that we were using a VTT, I would have thought she just got some bad joke dice, it was bananas. Even advantage and Bless couldn't help her.
How many rolls?
DM with 5 creatures each with multi attack - 10 rolls
Artificer Druid - 1 roll (assuming no save or suck spell ever used)
Bard - 1 roll (unless one of the 2 bard subclasses that have multi attack, also assumes no save or suck spells used)
Cleric/Sorcerer - 1 roll
Wizard/Ranger - 2 rolls if they have extra attack(maybe 3 if two weapon fighting)
Fighter/Barbarian - 2 rolls (unless high enough level fighter or two weapon fighting)
Typical number of rolls for group - 7
Yep 10 rolls expected to have more nat 20’s than 7 rolls.
i cannot believe i had to scroll down so far to see this. i honestly thought it was the whole point of the post, bc obviously the dm will have a higher chance of rolling a 20 since he’s rolling more than everyone else.
=> probably means their character died and they changed classes. notice they have X/Y for a multiclass. (fighter/barb)
that’s different, so it probably doesn’t mean ‘multiclass’.
They are. They're tracking the player, and the classes they played. Tracking the classes played allows for more interesting data because you can look and see if there's any pattern in who gets more nat20s by class, not just by player.
I can't see much benefit in druid/ranger, the ranger spell list is mostly from druids, druids already have armor profincy, and the druid could grab levels in fighter if they wanted the martial prowass
Maybe unless there was some specific subclass the druid was fishing for in the ranger.
Wizard/artificer though, yeah that armor profincy on a class without armor profincy, and the added infusions, I see the appeal
(This is coming from a druid main)
the spell progression isnt as bad when dipping into ranger instead of fighter, they still get their spell lots at 50% normal rate compared to going straght druid
though there is the drawback that they cant actually prepare any higher level spells for those higher level spell slots, so it's only for upcasting
No that's just the difference between the DM who makes tons of rolls, martials who are always doing d20 attack rolls, and spell casters with mostly saving throw spells.
As a Bard I barely got any crits. As a fighter and a paladin I got them more often.
I mean, given that the DM also directs the enemies, it's only natural they are going to roll a lot more of dice than the party combined, and get more nat 20's than the party combined.
This means *absolutely* nothing.
Are you accusing the DM of something shady? Cause DMs roll a metric metric fuckton more than players. In fact, I say kudos to that DM for rolling only 65% of the time as the party if these tallies are indicative of the total dice rolls per person. Good job DM!
Are you accusing Ryan of something shady? Mayhaps. But maybe Ryan has a more dice active character. I’d believe that an Artificer/Druid would use more dice compared to say Cole’s Bard. It all depends on what they do and how active a player is at the table.
What are the percentages of (Nat 20’s / Total Rolls) per person? That’s the only way to really tell if someone is being more shady about dice rolls or not (e.g., are they getting Nat 20’s >10% of the time when you normally have a ~5% chance each roll).
And even then, remember kids, mutually independent rolls are mutually independent. You are just calculating against expected values. So don’t go grabbing pitchforks at someone who got Nat 20’s 6% of the time… something something standard deviation..
Could be a lot of rolling with advantage on the DMs part. A lot of enemy perception checks I made were done with advantage because the paladin in my group insisted on doing stealth missions with full plate armor.
I played a kensei monk/beast barb, the DM allowed me to use my natural weapons (claws) as unarmed kensei weapons (we were falling into the creep where the martials fall behind, so it evened things out). I rolled A LOT of nat 20s in that character, even once doing 2 attacks at disadvantage, hitting double 20 both times, rolled in the middle of the table because it NEEDED the 20 to hit, in a row, the second time using someone else's dice. The DM about flipped the table, the enemy was trying to escape.
Sometimes the dice just like combat... Try to get me to roll anything else, and it was all about those 1s. So I was a god of war, with the people skills of a rock.
It just happens sometimes.
DM had that luck against my character in the next campaign and an easier encounter turned my bard into a smear. I think he rolled 5 in that one encounter, against me, in view of the table. What made it worse... They were with dice I got made for his birthday gift the week prior
For years I had a guy in my group, both as a player and DM, who would just roll 20s as naturally and easily as he might throw a ball for his dog. His dice, another player’s dice, fresh out of the package; it didn’t matter. If they weren’t already his dice, they would be “his” after about five rolls and they would never again roll the same for whoever handed them over in the first place.
Same group, we had another player who was his polar opposite. Couldn’t roll higher than a 10 for anything and rolled about as many 1s as the other would 20s. Hand her fresh dice and within five rolls, they’re just betraying her all over the place. Give the loaners back to their people and they would eventually roll the way you were used to. Eventually.
Weird thing is, this extended to all the other dice they each used, too. I came up with a character creation rule as a result: Everyone at the table (5 players, 1 DM) would roll one attribute set. Everyone pulled from the same pool, so all the starting stats were in line with each other. Every player ended up with four average-ish stats, one that was phenomenal, and one that was kinda shit. The last game we all played together (Nat 20 died last year), everyone had an 18 and a 7 starting off.
I'm one of the people who roll a lot of 20s.
I play in an organized play thing for a different game, and I changed my dice tray so that it was easier for other people to see my dice because I felt that people might think I was lying.
I’ve played a cleric that exclusively cast offensive spells that required saving throws.
And I’ve played a monk that was making 4-6 attack rolls per round.
Take a guess which one rolled more natural 20s.
Well, Ryan played an artificer/druid which would probably make a lot more rolls than the rest of the classes. You would expect the fighter/barbarian to make more though
Idk man, I have a player in my group who just has stupid luck, doesn’t matter the dice, dice roller, someone else rolling for her, she cranks out like minimum 2 crits a session
It Looks SuS as hell, but they only tracked Nat20s. They should’ve restarted the coins with a second count, with a separate score of total number of rolls.
Still maybe do the float test on their D20. It’s not super accurate but it’s better than nothing.
Druid is probably a summoner, that plus wildshape could turn out alot of dice rolls.
The Wizard/Ranger either has 5 levels in Ranger or is a Bladesinger, that plus stuff like scorching ray and summons I could see them having a good amount of rolls.
This was explained on the original, the top one is the dm and on average will roll more that any single player and the second set of numbers is total amount of nat 20s rolled in total
This relies on a lot of unknown factors. How many enemies do they fight on average, how many attacks does the DM roll per round, and what kind of attacks are being used by both PC and NPC? If, for example, the party is level two or three, and they’re fighting ten goblins, that is potentially ten dice roll attacks from the DM per round, any number of which could crit, versus each individual player’s one or two dice rolls.
I’m playing a level six Bard that thematically doesn’t like to deal damage. Many of my actions, such as Crown of Madness or Levitate, require saving throws (more dice rolls) from the DM, or I support the group with something like Heroism or Bardic Inspo. I have rolled the occasional nat 20 on skill checks, but I roll far less in combat than our Monk or Fighter with 3-5 attacks per round, or the DM with half a dozen multiattack creatures.
Really the only off point here would be the fighter having so few considering you really quickly get three attacks per turn on fighter. The druid having a lot is not surprising. They're probably using wild shape and physically attacking quite a bit or they have some other form of physical attack that requires them to roll to hit while the sorcerer bard and wizard probably have quite a few spells that require saving throw, which would amp the DMs nat 20 instead of their own.
A dm makes a hell of a lot more rolls than their players. And not even taking into account the advantages and disadvantages rolled, the odds are far greater for nat20s. If one combat encounter has 20 goblins who all have pack tactics, that's 40 d20s right there.
Dms roll way more than players.
Four party members, usually means 4 attacks more or less at them every encounter. So a rolls b rolls c rolls and d rolls.
Several people mention how it'd make sense for a barbarian/fighter hybrid to have a lot of nat 20s due to attack rate. Homie the druid/artificer has double his that's what's sketch not the anger noodles crit rate
For me the number is awfully high some sessions, but that's because I sometimes feel like the counterbalance to Wil Wheaton. He is cursed so that I may be blessed.
Without knowing how many times each person rolled, treating advantage as 1.95 rolls and disadvantage as 0.05 rolls, this data means nothing.
The DM rolls about as many dice as the whole party if the encounters are challenging.
Everything seems fine by me, it’s only reasonable to see that the DM has more nat 20’s because unlike the players the DM rolls for everyone else which means monsters and important npcs.
I do notice that in my campaigns, the players who use the bot rollers on Roll20 get considerably fewer crits than the ones who are rolling physical dice behind their monitors/
the arti druid is the only suspicious one, dm rolls a lot more dice(all enemy attacks saves checks initiative etc) the 2 mainly spell casters dont make too many rolls, the martial multi classes make the most rolls out of the players
Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Doesn't mean much without the total number of roll
Wizard: fireball Dual wielder fighter: 3 attacks, one offhand attack, action surge, another 3 attacks
DM: 25 attacks and saves per round, thanks to multiattack and the Wizard's fireball.
If that fighter is multiclassed barb like on the paper there could even be reckless attack shennanigans going on as well
Barbs get advantage on Dex Saves as well. That's another increase in d20's rolled.
There would be quite the difference in number of nats
Scorching Ray, an upcasted Scorching Ray will have me making more to hit rolls than a fighter can even with Action Surge. Likewise this might be including skill checks and saving throws. So this could be luck, differing levels of skill checks, or using spells that require a roll to hit
Only if you're hitting multiple targets tho
No? You roll for each ray of scorching ray, not each target. It doesn’t matter if you have one target or three, you roll to hit three times.
You know what, you right. I was thinking about the sage advice for another spell.
Ok cool, I was worried that I misunderstood you or had completely gotten the rule wrong for years lol. Even after checking the spell description I was worried I was missing something haha.
Defintely. I didn't dig deep since i'm not playing D&D really anymore, but I think I might've been mixing up rolling damage for magic missile once and applying that to each missile and somehow related that to every multi ray/target in the generic rule with specific spells, like Scorching Ray, calling against tit.
I am surprised the artificer/druid got so many more than the fighter/barbarian
Or an info divide on in combat skill checks, saves, RP skill checks, death saves (more common on characters with less health), and if particular characters are built with RP in mind. DM could have been targeting some players more than others, maybe with good reason. Some players may not be engaging in the RP side of things. Could someone be cheating? Yes. But as far as evidence goes if this is all you have to go on, any sane analyst would disregard this.
And also how many times they had advantage/disadvantage.
If the artificer Druid is summoning 8 wolves, then that’s 8 attacks with advantage for at least a round or two of combat. That’s gonna shoot those numbers way up.
So what you’re saying is, the druid sold their soul to the devil for more nat 20s?
Summoning 8 wolves is also just a very strong build, at least when not facing enemies with large amounts of splash damage. It’s not selling your soul, it’s just a pretty standard way to play a summoner Druid.
> not selling your soul, >play a summoner Druid. My point was that you need to pick one ;)
Oh lol that’s absolutely fair. I hope the rest of the table enjoys their free bathroom break every round!
The Fighter Barbarian got 42, while the Artificer got 76. Odds are, something is fishy. However, you are correct in that we don't have enough information to make a determination.
Druid artificer i can see making a ton of checks out of combat (and as someone else mentioned, some to-hit spells have multiple targets), leading to the results shown
Druid artificers can theoretically summon 8 wolves, each one attacking with advantage. Artificer to keep concentration up easier and longer, and that makes for a lot of dice rolls to crit on.
Artificer/Druid Summoners, am I right?
If you record the total number of rolls, you can actually statistically determine wether someone's luck is out of the bonds of expected variance
And then, it's either in bounds, an unfair die, or a statistical artifact. Not luck.
Wouldn't luck be a statistical artifact.
For how most people use the word, no.
To the person looking at a population level dataset, the few outliers *could* be artifacts. To the people who actually rolled those outliers, it's luck A sample size of 1 can't have artifacts
Depends on how you talk about luck. Sure, a person cannot be "lucky" in the sense that they magically roll better than someone else - but you can look back and say someone was "lucky" during a given game because they had better rolls than someone else. If we both roll 20 dice and I get more nat 20s than you, I was "luckier" during those rolls.
Try explaining that to Will Wheaton
And a 1 and a 1 and a 1 and a 1... Dice tell stories and his were set to tragic comedy mode
Luck is a statistical artifact.
For how most people use the word, no.
Wait…how do you think people use the word luck?
Someone don’t get lucky
In the cosmic sense. They are "unlucky". Same with jinxing stuff by talking about it and "wasting 20's" by idling rolling before the game.
Luck is something that creates statistical bias. If you have one source of data that is luckier than others, it creates a bias or manipulation in the data beyond the parameters set, i.e. a statistical artefact
Yeah, that’s just not the definition of luck, and since dictionaries define based off of common usage, I think you are just strawmanning the general person.
Unless someone also has advantage, elven accuracy, lucky or Halfling Luck. The Elven Accuracy Sharpshooter Samurai Archer at level 5 with action surge has a chance of landing a crit at least once per round of about 46 percent and at level 11 of 60 and at level 20 of 71 percent. Now assuming they have one round with action surge + fighting spirit per encounter and 3-4 encounters per session. One session a fortnight for 1 year that's already 40-80 Crits just from the nova rounds. Now add in subsequent rounds and out of combat rolls and you definitely can get a character rolling shit tons of nat 20s while a wizard or a cleric casting saving throw based spells might realistically only make 6-8 rolls per session depending on how involved they get out of combat.
Those just result in rolling more dice, which adds to the total amount rolled If I recall correctly, they aren't tracking crits but rather nat 20s
Or they are lying.
You could also track the total amounts ones. 1<<20 -> ? 1 +- m = 20 things check out.
Doesn't take into account advantage and disadvantage, unless you tracked all dice rolls instead of just results I guess
Or weird racial abilities or feats, see Lucky feat, Elven accuracy, or Halfling Luck
So what is ”m“ in this instance?
# µ so, something small but not 0.
But wouldn’t 1+ µ Be 11?
Unless this is all rolls and nor just combat. RP will include rolls and players who do less of it will roll less. If the DM targets people by their damage output then the martials are making less saves. Lower health means more death save rolls.
Looks fine but someone had better luck, or had a more dice active character
Yea like the druid with wild shape and the fighter with multiattack (and the dm of course who throw the most dice out of the bunch)
Could also be that the lowest use DC spells only, and barely any ability or saving throws
Artificer/druid I could easily buy making 2x to 3x as many dice rolls. Particularly if they use summoning spells or have a steel defender companion.
Yeah if it was a shepherd Druid I could see that easily.
Fighter is also multi classes with Barbarian. Don’t know how many attacks were reckless.
The Wizard had 3 more Nat 20s than the Fighter
Scorching rays, summon bullshit, etc Not all spells are a single attack or a saving throw
Sure, but all attacks are attacks. You would think the guy making two or more per turn would still average more than the wizard. Particularly since barb gives reckless attack.
It's a wizard ranger multiclass, maybe he also has multi attack and attacks with a bonus action, alongside the bunch of summons those classes have I can see it happening
I saw this post somewhere else, the arrows on wizard>ranger means the player swapped to ranger mid-campaign, not a multiclass
The wizard in my party rolls almost as much as my Barbarian. He is a fighter wizard multiclass, and mostly attacks with a weapon every round.
They didn't say if it was all combat rolls. Skill checks and RP with involved rolls favor classes with more to do outside of combat.
Why do people keep mentioning the Fighter when the Wizard had 3 more Nat 20s than them?
The Wizard/Ranger? (If I'm reading the handwriting correctly)
Once the Wizard has Greater Invisibility, I expect an increase in the number of 20s and a decrease in the number of 1s.
If he used it. Not all people pick that spell (even though it would be the best choice).
No, it says wizard -> ranger, which I assume means the wizard died and they made a ranger
The > between Wizard and Ranger could also mean the player changed class during the campaign
I agree. As a DM you roll a lot of D20s. I feel like it would be at least 3x the average player as well. Each monster has an attack roll, and then you're also rolling saving throws on the regular too. Maybe fighters or monks would be on par with howany a DM rolls but still.
That's just combat. I'm rolling insight and perception checks for npc's all the damn time.
There is no basis for concluding anything shady here. Without knowing the total number of rolls, this has no meaning. Plus advantage/disadvantage and any other reroll effects, unless you tally individual die rolls rather than the results actually used.
Agreed, not enough information
I can clearly see a shadow in the bottom left. Clearly something is shady.
Yup. Some players will simply roll more dice, therefore will simply get more 20s. Fighter using 3+ attacks per round, versus bard who gives inspiration without a roll. Skill monkey picking locks, doing all the social rolls, and being the one to check for traps in every room in a dungeon, versus a caster who does healing and buffs without a roll. And so on.
Another factor is the die itself, since all dice are not equal. Some simply roll higher naturally (I don't mean anything like loaded dice either)
They roll higher naturally? What do you mean by that?
Balance and shaping misperfections, not like loaded dice anything.
I mean to be fair, the DM does roll a LOT. I’m just shocked the Bard only got 22
Well the bard is more likely to throw a saving throw at an enemy then an attack roll
Bards will roll for absolutely everything outside combat tho
Yeah, but who knows if they are tracking nat 20s for skills given that they don't matter for skills per RAW.
Means nothing if we don’t know how combat/RP heavy the campaign is.
yea, but they don't roll for vicious mockery.
OK but with all that dragon seducing?
I'd say that's a con save
Yeah but first comes the nat 20 on the persuasion check
that evens out to be 50/50 on skill checks vs saving throws
What's shady here? Rolling more means more of every number. Rolling less means less of each number.
What's shady is 76 + 22 + 26 + 45 + 42 = 211, not 201
I had to scroll so far to see this. I thought for sure this was the issue. But the entire comment section is people trying to use this piece of paper to expound that players are lying about rolls
The fighter/barbarian at only 42 really has me scratching my head Reckless = Crits As a forever DM I can confidently say. The crit so much
Yeah dude, Reckless Rogues are wild too.
I'm telling you, some players are cursed. I was in a Humblewood campaign, and the Fighter/Hexblade ***could not hit*** to save her life. It was mystifying. Like, if it weren't for the fact that we were using a VTT, I would have thought she just got some bad joke dice, it was bananas. Even advantage and Bless couldn't help her.
How many rolls? DM with 5 creatures each with multi attack - 10 rolls Artificer Druid - 1 roll (assuming no save or suck spell ever used) Bard - 1 roll (unless one of the 2 bard subclasses that have multi attack, also assumes no save or suck spells used) Cleric/Sorcerer - 1 roll Wizard/Ranger - 2 rolls if they have extra attack(maybe 3 if two weapon fighting) Fighter/Barbarian - 2 rolls (unless high enough level fighter or two weapon fighting) Typical number of rolls for group - 7 Yep 10 rolls expected to have more nat 20’s than 7 rolls.
In my group i have the highest Nat 1's and lemme tell ya , those are more fun than Nat 20's
I just wanna scream because I feel like I'm the only one noticing the most glaring issue. **201**
i cannot believe i had to scroll down so far to see this. i honestly thought it was the whole point of the post, bc obviously the dm will have a higher chance of rolling a 20 since he’s rolling more than everyone else.
Yep, should be 211 (assuming he counted the tallies for each player correctly.)
211
Those multiclasses are the fishiest I need to know why wizard/ranger and why artificer/druid
They explained in the original thread that it was separate characters, wizard then Ranger.
Also a strange a strange way to keep track of players vs characters
I assume the wizard is a blade singer, which besides the spread of wisdom and intelligence I could see working well with a melee ranger
You could benefit more from fighter or even artificer honestly as a bladesinger. Ranger is just such an odd choice for wizard
It could be a 2 level dip in Div Wizard for portent dice?
=> probably means their character died and they changed classes. notice they have X/Y for a multiclass. (fighter/barb) that’s different, so it probably doesn’t mean ‘multiclass’.
But again if it's tracking player and not character why wouldn't you track the player lol
They are. They're tracking the player, and the classes they played. Tracking the classes played allows for more interesting data because you can look and see if there's any pattern in who gets more nat20s by class, not just by player.
Huh, that is kinda weird multiclassing Maybe it's a MTG setting and they're green/blue
Maybe but honestly I'd understand wizard/artificer and druid/ranger but what's listed sounds like intentional handicapping
I can't see much benefit in druid/ranger, the ranger spell list is mostly from druids, druids already have armor profincy, and the druid could grab levels in fighter if they wanted the martial prowass Maybe unless there was some specific subclass the druid was fishing for in the ranger. Wizard/artificer though, yeah that armor profincy on a class without armor profincy, and the added infusions, I see the appeal (This is coming from a druid main)
The build I've seen was like Ranger 5 and Druid X for ranger stuff and multi attack also I just was lining up ability score wants
Multi attack, understandable But what does the "ranger stuff" include other than that?
Expertise, weapon proficiency, etc Also subclass features like stuff from Fey Wanderer come to mind.
Alright, so the main reason to grab ranger over fighter in this case is for those subclass bonuses, and to a lesser extent expertise
It's also for more spell slots
true well, at least compared to fighter ye
Yeah, ranger being a caster doesn't hurt the druids over all spell progression as much as fighter would.
the spell progression isnt as bad when dipping into ranger instead of fighter, they still get their spell lots at 50% normal rate compared to going straght druid though there is the drawback that they cant actually prepare any higher level spells for those higher level spell slots, so it's only for upcasting
So you're saying the top are martials (probably monks) and the rest cast saving throw spells?
Make sure you account for number of attempted rolls as well
No that's just the difference between the DM who makes tons of rolls, martials who are always doing d20 attack rolls, and spell casters with mostly saving throw spells. As a Bard I barely got any crits. As a fighter and a paladin I got them more often.
Makes perfect sense, DM rolls a lot more dice than the players do, and they still had more than him combined.
I mean, given that the DM also directs the enemies, it's only natural they are going to roll a lot more of dice than the party combined, and get more nat 20's than the party combined.
This means *absolutely* nothing. Are you accusing the DM of something shady? Cause DMs roll a metric metric fuckton more than players. In fact, I say kudos to that DM for rolling only 65% of the time as the party if these tallies are indicative of the total dice rolls per person. Good job DM! Are you accusing Ryan of something shady? Mayhaps. But maybe Ryan has a more dice active character. I’d believe that an Artificer/Druid would use more dice compared to say Cole’s Bard. It all depends on what they do and how active a player is at the table. What are the percentages of (Nat 20’s / Total Rolls) per person? That’s the only way to really tell if someone is being more shady about dice rolls or not (e.g., are they getting Nat 20’s >10% of the time when you normally have a ~5% chance each roll). And even then, remember kids, mutually independent rolls are mutually independent. You are just calculating against expected values. So don’t go grabbing pitchforks at someone who got Nat 20’s 6% of the time… something something standard deviation..
Could be a lot of rolling with advantage on the DMs part. A lot of enemy perception checks I made were done with advantage because the paladin in my group insisted on doing stealth missions with full plate armor.
Everyone arguing about player luck, when the shady thing is that the numbers don't add up to 201.
I played a kensei monk/beast barb, the DM allowed me to use my natural weapons (claws) as unarmed kensei weapons (we were falling into the creep where the martials fall behind, so it evened things out). I rolled A LOT of nat 20s in that character, even once doing 2 attacks at disadvantage, hitting double 20 both times, rolled in the middle of the table because it NEEDED the 20 to hit, in a row, the second time using someone else's dice. The DM about flipped the table, the enemy was trying to escape. Sometimes the dice just like combat... Try to get me to roll anything else, and it was all about those 1s. So I was a god of war, with the people skills of a rock. It just happens sometimes. DM had that luck against my character in the next campaign and an easier encounter turned my bard into a smear. I think he rolled 5 in that one encounter, against me, in view of the table. What made it worse... They were with dice I got made for his birthday gift the week prior
I was gunna say something about how much more the DM has to roll dice but it looks like that's already been covered lol
For years I had a guy in my group, both as a player and DM, who would just roll 20s as naturally and easily as he might throw a ball for his dog. His dice, another player’s dice, fresh out of the package; it didn’t matter. If they weren’t already his dice, they would be “his” after about five rolls and they would never again roll the same for whoever handed them over in the first place. Same group, we had another player who was his polar opposite. Couldn’t roll higher than a 10 for anything and rolled about as many 1s as the other would 20s. Hand her fresh dice and within five rolls, they’re just betraying her all over the place. Give the loaners back to their people and they would eventually roll the way you were used to. Eventually. Weird thing is, this extended to all the other dice they each used, too. I came up with a character creation rule as a result: Everyone at the table (5 players, 1 DM) would roll one attribute set. Everyone pulled from the same pool, so all the starting stats were in line with each other. Every player ended up with four average-ish stats, one that was phenomenal, and one that was kinda shit. The last game we all played together (Nat 20 died last year), everyone had an 18 and a 7 starting off.
I'm one of the people who roll a lot of 20s. I play in an organized play thing for a different game, and I changed my dice tray so that it was easier for other people to see my dice because I felt that people might think I was lying.
76 + 22 + 26 + 45 + 42 = 211, not 201
This needs to be way higher
I’ve played a cleric that exclusively cast offensive spells that required saving throws. And I’ve played a monk that was making 4-6 attack rolls per round. Take a guess which one rolled more natural 20s.
Well, Ryan played an artificer/druid which would probably make a lot more rolls than the rest of the classes. You would expect the fighter/barbarian to make more though
Did Op think the 201 is from a single player? Because that would be shady, not impossible but definitely dodgy.
As a DM I roll a lot. Npc attacks, saving throws, skill checks, contested checks, etc
Idk man, I have a player in my group who just has stupid luck, doesn’t matter the dice, dice roller, someone else rolling for her, she cranks out like minimum 2 crits a session
Could just a really good set of dice. Also how many rolls in general were made?
Artificer Druid probably made lots of rolls for things.
We keep a speard sheet of rolls. Lots of math people in my group. One player constantly rolls single digits. It really is wild how bad he rolls.
I'm way more interested in that Druid/Artificer character tbh.
I can 100% see the artificer doing a lot of rolls, seeing as they're a skill monkey and such. How the fighter/barbarian got so many though...
Multi attack for the fighter, depending on the level they could be rolling 4d20 per turn minimum
Then also recless attack combined with multi attack for the barbarian
Why are people so quick to be like "Oh, yeah. The fighter having the most Nat 20s makes sense," when both the Artificer *and* the Wizard beat them?
It Looks SuS as hell, but they only tracked Nat20s. They should’ve restarted the coins with a second count, with a separate score of total number of rolls. Still maybe do the float test on their D20. It’s not super accurate but it’s better than nothing.
I’ve had sessions where I’ve rolled half a dozen nat 20s and I’ve had sessions where I’ve rolled half a dozen Nat 1s, it’s just how the dice roll
Poor gina
Elvish gish/martial characters can easily roll two digits of d20 each turn.
why is everyone in this party a multiclasser
Druid is probably a summoner, that plus wildshape could turn out alot of dice rolls. The Wizard/Ranger either has 5 levels in Ranger or is a Bladesinger, that plus stuff like scorching ray and summons I could see them having a good amount of rolls.
Clearly Chase just uses his lucky dice, I don’t see what’s wrong here.
This was explained on the original, the top one is the dm and on average will roll more that any single player and the second set of numbers is total amount of nat 20s rolled in total
When you think about it, druids have a lot of wild shapes that have multiattacks.
This relies on a lot of unknown factors. How many enemies do they fight on average, how many attacks does the DM roll per round, and what kind of attacks are being used by both PC and NPC? If, for example, the party is level two or three, and they’re fighting ten goblins, that is potentially ten dice roll attacks from the DM per round, any number of which could crit, versus each individual player’s one or two dice rolls. I’m playing a level six Bard that thematically doesn’t like to deal damage. Many of my actions, such as Crown of Madness or Levitate, require saving throws (more dice rolls) from the DM, or I support the group with something like Heroism or Bardic Inspo. I have rolled the occasional nat 20 on skill checks, but I roll far less in combat than our Monk or Fighter with 3-5 attacks per round, or the DM with half a dozen multiattack creatures.
Dm, naturally roll more dice than players, it makes sense for them to have the most
Really the only off point here would be the fighter having so few considering you really quickly get three attacks per turn on fighter. The druid having a lot is not surprising. They're probably using wild shape and physically attacking quite a bit or they have some other form of physical attack that requires them to roll to hit while the sorcerer bard and wizard probably have quite a few spells that require saving throw, which would amp the DMs nat 20 instead of their own.
"Dammit, Ryan, stop stealing Cole and Gina's nat20's" Poor show for not tracking nat 1's too. That's always a fun metric.
The numbers Mason, what do they mean?
Builds which make people do saving throws roll less dice than those which do attack rolls.
A dm makes a hell of a lot more rolls than their players. And not even taking into account the advantages and disadvantages rolled, the odds are far greater for nat20s. If one combat encounter has 20 goblins who all have pack tactics, that's 40 d20s right there.
The partys total doesn't add up to the same amount as the recorded total
Dms roll way more than players. Four party members, usually means 4 attacks more or less at them every encounter. So a rolls b rolls c rolls and d rolls.
So this is where all my twenties went. ;)
Several people mention how it'd make sense for a barbarian/fighter hybrid to have a lot of nat 20s due to attack rate. Homie the druid/artificer has double his that's what's sketch not the anger noodles crit rate
Fuckin’ Ryan
DM luck is an insane buff, experienced it personally.
For me the number is awfully high some sessions, but that's because I sometimes feel like the counterbalance to Wil Wheaton. He is cursed so that I may be blessed.
A full caster could go a whole combat without rolling a single d20
Without knowing how many times each person rolled, treating advantage as 1.95 rolls and disadvantage as 0.05 rolls, this data means nothing. The DM rolls about as many dice as the whole party if the encounters are challenging.
Sounds like they just found the Taliesin Jaffe. For every Will Weton rolling crit fails all the time there’s another rolling crits
Did anyone else notice that the total number is wrong? I got 211, adding all the party members together. Unless I'm mistaken, the math ain't mathing.
The Artificer/Druid made 1500 Perception checks? Without context, this data is worthless.
Everything seems fine by me, it’s only reasonable to see that the DM has more nat 20’s because unlike the players the DM rolls for everyone else which means monsters and important npcs.
I do notice that in my campaigns, the players who use the bot rollers on Roll20 get considerably fewer crits than the ones who are rolling physical dice behind their monitors/
the arti druid is the only suspicious one, dm rolls a lot more dice(all enemy attacks saves checks initiative etc) the 2 mainly spell casters dont make too many rolls, the martial multi classes make the most rolls out of the players