Maniacal_cackle Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 Playing my first practice game with the nightmare crew, everyone was amazed at how big my 'removed from game' stack got even with just five models. It got me wondering, just how much could the Dreamer remove in a single game? It turns out the answer is technically the entire deck except for the two jokers. There's lots of possible lists that can do it if you include summoning, but the most obvious basic list that doesn't even need summoning would be: 3 day dreams 3 alps 3 stitched together 1 insidious madness 1 lord chompy bits 1 dreamer 1 stone. That's ten minions + LCB for 11 total lucid dreams per turn, meaning you could power through 55 cards through the course of five turns (only need 52 to get your deck down to jokers). Is this useful information? No, I can't see it being relevant in practice very often. But it does crack me up that it's technically possible to get a game state of a black joker in hand and a deck consisting of a single red joker. If a Dreamer player ever tries to convince you to play a six turn game, say no! I imagine the rules also break down a bit at this stage (how do you do - or + flips? If the red joker and black joker are in hand and your deck is empty, what do you do when instructed to flip cards? Etc). But it does sum up the power of lucid dreams pretty handily for conveying an idea of how much it can affect a deck! Just thought I'd share this interesting bit of information. If anyone ever achieves this in game, buy yourself a cookie or something. You deserve it. 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludvig Posted August 2, 2019 Report Share Posted August 2, 2019 You reshuffle if you can't draw enough cards but a plus flip with a single card deck would just break the game I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralvorkraft Posted August 3, 2019 Report Share Posted August 3, 2019 Having played against dreamer I do think Lucid Dreaming has been consistently undervalued. By the end of turn two you can expect to win pretty much every flip before cheating. It's not as oppressive as, say, Chi (with the possible exception of Stitched) but it feels every bit as good as Rig the Deck, etc. 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted August 5, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2019 On 8/4/2019 at 2:43 AM, admiralvorkraft said: Having played against dreamer I do think Lucid Dreaming has been consistently undervalued. By the end of turn two you can expect to win pretty much every flip before cheating. It's not as oppressive as, say, Chi (with the possible exception of Stitched) but it feels every bit as good as Rig the Deck, etc. What do you think is the right balance between taking our henchmen and enforcer (who don't have lucid dream) vs. Taking our minions (who can dream but are worse models)? I feel like I should be taking a mixture so I have models that really benefit from a strong deck, but I have no idea what mixture is right for different scenarios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted August 5, 2019 Report Share Posted August 5, 2019 I need to dig out the card removal simulator I wrote up during the beta. From what I remember of the math, while there’s a general statistical upward trend, in the first two turns there’s a significant split between best case and worst case scenarios for the Dreamer player.  And thus a lot of potential for confirmation bias. It’s a significant effect, but it takes a while before it’s a greater effect than having a positive flip.  2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted August 5, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2019 55 minutes ago, solkan said: I need to dig out the card removal simulator I wrote up during the beta. From what I remember of the math, while there’s a general statistical upward trend, in the first two turns there’s a significant split between best case and worst case scenarios for the Dreamer player.  And thus a lot of potential for confirmation bias. It’s a significant effect, but it takes a while before it’s a greater effect than having a positive flip.  Well if you remove all 1-4s (the 20 lowest cards), your median card flip value increases by 2. Which is significant, but as you say, no positive flip. I think where it makes a huge difference is damage flips. It massively increases your odds of getting good damage on a 2/4/6 track, 2/4/5, or 1/3/4 if you remove even 10 weak cards. And a lot of the crew is designed to do tons of damage on moderate+. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted August 5, 2019 Report Share Posted August 5, 2019 6 minutes ago, Maniacal_cackle said: Well if you remove all 1-4s (the 20 lowest cards), your median card flip value increases by 2. Which is significant, but as you say, no positive flip. I think where it makes a huge difference is damage flips. It massively increases your odds of getting good damage on a 2/4/6 track, 2/4/5, or 1/3/4 if you remove even 10 weak cards. And a lot of the crew is designed to do tons of damage on moderate+. The "if you remove all 1-4s" is the issue. The simple deck simulator that I tried writing just did a simple routine: Generate a deck, run lucid dreaming X number of times, do Gamble Y times if above average cards need to be saved, putting an arbitrary deck shuffle in every Y lucid dreaming executions. and then did that a few thousand times tracking the average value of the deck+discard pile, and tracking best and worst results. Not trying to do anything fancy, just a quick 10,000 trials each...  (I believe these numbers include using Stitched periodically to put high cards back into the deck, but my notes are a mess and I'm posting these numbers prematurely) Lucid Dream 8 times: Best result 7.95 Worst 7.0625 Average: 7.6 Lucid Dream 16 times: Best result 9.8 Worst 8.1 Average: 9.0 Lucid Dream 24 times: Best result: 10.64 Worst result: 8.8 Average: 9.9 Lucid Dream 42 times: Best result: 11.3 Worst result: 9.4 Average: 10.85 where the unmodified deck's average is 7.0. To illustrate the luck factor: Lucid Dream 4 times, 40,000 trials with no Stitched rescuing cards: Worst result: 6.7 Best result: 7.48 Average: 7.25 So it's funny.  When you just start out doing lucid dreaming, your first few attempts are going to be essentially random.  But if you have Stitched around to rescue high cards, there is gradual, inevitable progress towards only having high cards in the deck. Because Lucid Dreaming is subject to the same whims of chance that negative flips are.  Remember all of those times that a model with  or on a damage flip flips over all moderates or all severes?  -On average-, you eliminate a low card or a moderate card each time.  But roughly 8 out of 27 times (rolling deck probabilities left as exercise to reader), you're eliminating a high or medium card instead. I think it'll become a game of "How fast are the Stitched going to die?"  Because they're how you benefit from getting high card removed, and how you really bend the process in your favor. The mechanism for replacing losses, Manifest Nightmares, has a suited target number.  Which means that when you've got choices for your Lucid Dreaming card removal, if you don't have any soul stones you need to avoid removing high masks to replace casualties.  3 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralvorkraft Posted August 5, 2019 Report Share Posted August 5, 2019 It really seems to skew damage flips and more importantly it frees up resources by mitigating the need for focus and cheating. From what I've seen widow weaver and Chompy can do plenty. Then just try and keep 3 stitched on the table and you're good to go. Avoid early combats with your superior mobility and you should be in good shape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted August 6, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 @solkan, very interesting! Although seems to confirm removing ~20 cards has quite a potent effect. But also goes to show that the strategy of "just spam lucid dreams" seems to be pretty questioanble. For my third game, I'm thinking of trying only two minions in the initial list and filling out with henchmen/enforcers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CD1248 Posted August 6, 2019 Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 Having played against Dreamer a good bit I don't see any particular reason not to bring 3xDaydream. Aside from Lucid Dream, it's attack is oddly good for a 3ss minion since it can choose Df or Wp, Lead Nightmare is great, it's insignificant so your opponent can't get points off it, and in a pinch they're ablative wounds for Dreamer. Just all around fantastic models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakunin Posted August 6, 2019 Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 That's the thing that keeps it from being absurd. You don't get to pick which card is dreamed away, you get to pick which of three random cards goes away. In the long run it'll be an advantage, but there's a chance of it backfiring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted August 6, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 38 minutes ago, CD1248 said: Having played against Dreamer a good bit I don't see any particular reason not to bring 3xDaydream. Aside from Lucid Dream, it's attack is oddly good for a 3ss minion since it can choose Df or Wp, Lead Nightmare is great, it's insignificant so your opponent can't get points off it, and in a pinch they're ablative wounds for Dreamer. Just all around fantastic models. My thinking of going 2x daydreams is it makes it a bit easier to snag an extra model via summoning. Currently you cap out at a 17 (11 card) with insidious madness, but with a daydream, you have a play for 18 and 19 as well, so you can use your 12s and 13s. Of course for a 20 (red joker) you always have the double alp plan as well. I'd normally try to go three, but it's hard to fit more than Widow Weaver + Bandersnatch + Teddy + Coppelius/Serena + 2 daydreams + upgrades/stones for cache when going heavy enforcer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wenshai Posted August 6, 2019 Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 Are bandersnatch worth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted August 6, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 17 minutes ago, Wenshai said: Are bandersnatch worth? I'm not sure! I'm hoping to find out! They seem hyper-mobile, especially if paired with Widow Weaver. In some scenarios you're going to hop ~14 inches at start of activation, leap into shadow for another 6", and then take two melee attacks against a model that started 20" away. Alternatively, hop ~14 inches + run another 12 inches + create a web to prepare another jump for itself or widow weaver. I'm playing Turf War on Thursday, so this level of mobility will really help me hold multiple markers, and have enough fighting power that I can contest them if need be. I imagine Bandersnatch is good on turf war and plant explosives due to hyper mobility with some room left to interact leftover. Don't think it has quite enough health for corrupted idols, but guess we'll find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santaclaws01 Posted August 6, 2019 Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Maniacal_cackle said: I'm not sure! I'm hoping to find out! They seem hyper-mobile, especially if paired with Widow Weaver. In some scenarios you're going to hop ~14 inches at start of activation, leap into shadow for another 6", and then take two melee attacks against a model that started 20" away. Alternatively, hop ~14 inches + run another 12 inches + create a web to prepare another jump for itself or widow weaver. Bandersnatch has to start the activation burried to be able to attack while burried. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted August 6, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2019 8 hours ago, santaclaws01 said: Bandersnatch has to start the activation burried to be able to attack while burried. Oh, good point! So can't even dart out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted December 3, 2019 Report Share Posted December 3, 2019 I finally got around to messing around with the Python code some more, and decided to try adding an indication of the weak/moderate/severe distribution in the decks. Disclaimer:  This is only generating 100,000 trials.  52 factorial or 54 factorial is massively larger than that.  Combined with the fact that I haven't redone the sim to generate enough information to calculate standard deviations yet, please take this with a grain of salt.  After all, it is entirely possible to perform Lucid Dreaming four times, and each time remove a severe card.  It's incredibly unlikely, unless you sorted your cards and forgot to shuffle, but it is possible. Just doing Lucid Dreaming, without any card rescue. 4 times Deck average: 7.25 Average number of weak cards removed: 3.04 Average number of moderate cards removed: 0.9 Average number of severe cards removed: 0.06 8 times Deck average: 7.6 Average number of weak cards removed: 6.1 Average number of moderate cards removed: 1.8 Average number of severe cards removed 0.1 16 times Deck average: 8.2 Average number of weak cards removed: 11.4 Average number of moderate cards removed: 4.3 Average number of severe cards removed: 0.3 24 times Deck average: 8.9 Average number of weak cards removed: 15.8 Average number of moderate cards removed: 7.6 Average number of severe cards removed: 0.6 32 times Deck average: 9.8 Average number of weak cards removed: 18.7 Average number of moderate cards removed: 12.0 Average number of severe cards removed: 1.3 40 times Deck average 10.8 Average number of weak cards removed: 19.95 Average number of moderate cards removed: 17.2 Average number of severe cards removed: 2.8 48 times Deck average 10.8 Average number of weak cards removed: 19.999 Average number of moderate cards removed: 19.96 Average number of severe cards removed: 8.3 52 times. 👻 Deck average:  7 Stop dreaming.  You've eliminated all of the non-jokers from the deck. Now I've got to go look up how to do incremental standard deviations instead of just running averages... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted December 4, 2019 Report Share Posted December 4, 2019 And now the wall of numbers that I'm sure everyone is waiting for. The data is <minimum observed value>,<average value>,<maximum observed value>,variance, number of trials (everything says 2000000 because that's how many loops were performed). "Deck Average observations" is the average of all of the cards still in play (in deck or discard pile) after that many Lucid Dream actions. "Overall X removed" is the number of that category of card removed.  The min and max values were reported partly to see how much range the sim was covering, and to show that if you get the right luck, a lot of things away from the average are possible. Methodology was to generate a set of random cards, and perform the operation described in the Lucid Dreaming action that specified number of times.  If more than 8 lucid dreaming operations were done, the deck was shuffled after every 8th action, and otherwise whenever the deck would run out. The player's hand was ignored in the simulation, and it was assumed that any flips due to other actions happening during the turn could be ignored due to being equivalent to the deck in a different order. 4 Lucid Deck Average observations, 6.74, 7.253562650000096, 7.48, 0.009175383124977052, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 0, 3.034429000000017, 4, 0.6593241439590208, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 0.906954000000029, 4, 0.6360729418839504, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.058616999999997456, 3, 0.05662604731099937, 2000000 8 Lucid Deck Average observations, 6.869565217391305, 7.55139465217407, 7.956521739130435, 0.01755307365986903, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 1, 6.070831000000122, 8, 1.1222064694389902, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 1.8116400000000457, 7, 1.0956430104000274, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.11752899999999433, 3, 0.11016793415900206, 2000000 12 Lucid Deck Average observations, 6.928571428571429, 7.844190309523655, 8.404761904761905, 0.02964243502491636, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 2, 8.749514500000892, 12, 1.61623751428978, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 3.039467000000026, 10, 1.5857963559111232, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.2110185000000044, 4, 0.19400069265776076, 2000000 16 Lucid Deck Average observations, 7.2105263157894735, 8.199056644736462, 8.894736842105264, 0.03928537531630487, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 5, 11.430367000000277, 16, 1.821255745311055, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 4.2648834999997725, 11, 1.8245522314277685, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.30474949999997664, 4, 0.2706437422497696, 2000000 20 Lucid Deck Average observations, 7.117647058823529, 8.536974735294313, 9.323529411764707, 0.05456620026480721, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 7, 13.603115999999844, 19, 1.9810735905440164, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 5.930531500000333, 13, 2.0282881275077793, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.4663525000000105, 5, 0.3978308457437729, 2000000 24 Lucid Deck Average observations, 7.6, 8.965607333333288, 9.8, 0.06307019003511209, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 9, 15.777200999999932, 20, 1.765199605599032, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 1, 7.594880500000252, 15, 1.9225901907198075, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.6279185000000437, 5, 0.504385357357755, 2000000 28 Lucid Deck Average observations, 7.730769230769231, 9.34973786538513, 10.23076923076923, 0.08036939888899698, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 11, 17.264095500000753, 20, 1.5001900668797463, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 3, 9.796382499999847, 17, 1.8011309136937197, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.939522000000013, 5, 0.6914529115159992, 2000000 32 Lucid Deck Average observations, 8.136363636363637, 9.872876750000444, 10.636363636363637, 0.0769935326152234, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 14, 18.747950500000318, 20, 0.8781410495496746, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 7, 12.000556000000321, 18, 1.4115306908639633, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 1.251493499999996, 6, 0.8072700194577763, 2000000 36 Lucid Deck Average observations, 8.444444444444445, 10.270487138889058, 11.0, 0.09015191448582689, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 15, 19.398743499999526, 20, 0.49548662120775916, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 9, 14.63933649999966, 20, 1.2545338397677663, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 1.9619200000000112, 7, 0.998862913599973, 2000000 40 Lucid Deck Average observations, 9.071428571428571, 10.808915071429004, 11.285714285714286, 0.05317581282795468, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 17, 19.953654000001524, 20, 0.04597504828399978, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 12, 17.22110500000061, 20, 0.9399685789750376, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 2.8252410000000756, 8, 0.9316902919189565, 2000000 44 Lucid Deck Average observations, 9.5, 11.034629100000103, 11.4, 0.04601335043318797, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 18, 19.993302999999315, 20, 0.006873150191000125, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 16, 19.218437000001096, 20, 0.5118547770309961, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 4, 4.788260000000078, 9, 0.5137886724000048, 2000000 48 Lucid Deck Average observations, 8.833333333333334, 10.775121666666553, 11.0, 0.02696956853055637, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 19, 19.999993500000286, 20, 0.00020649995774999882, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 18, 19.963882000000904, 20, 0.03558349007600358, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 8, 8.036124499999547, 10, 0.03542252049974717, 2000000  At 52 Lucid Dreaming you have only the two jokers left. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShinChan Posted December 4, 2019 Report Share Posted December 4, 2019 Thanks @solkan! I'm using my own with different variants that maybe you would like to consider. For example the possibility of 1/2/3 Stitched Together bringing back cards or defining a number of lucid dreams in each turn, which shows the status of the deck (and the hand) at the beginning of every turn. Also, reached a certain point, it's interesting to consider the cards in hand, since starting in T3 (with 5-7 LD each turn) you're most likely saving high cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted December 4, 2019 Report Share Posted December 4, 2019 4 minutes ago, ShinChan said: Thanks @solkan! I'm using my own with different variants that maybe you would like to consider. For example the possibility of 1/2/3 Stitched Together bringing back cards or defining a number of lucid dreams in each turn, which shows the status of the deck (and the hand) at the beginning of every turn. Those are some decent ideas.  I need to write a different test loop to do five "turns" of 'X Lucid, Y Fiendish Gamble, random shuffles' with sampling at the end of each turn.  So I probably won't take this idea up right away.  But I'll think about it. The thing about Fiendish Gamble is that it's really improving the expected value very much (it increases it by a few tenths) as it cancels out the times where Lucid Dreams would have lowered the average.  For comparison with the previous data, this is 8 Lucid Dreaming, 3 Fiendish Gamble rescuing above average cards: Deck Average observations, 7.061224489795919, 7.580095426189035, 7.956521739130435, 0.012283416913549597, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 1, 6.070606999999695, 8, 1.119455151551049, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 1.0928679999999642, 6, 0.7802270345759954, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.0, 0, 0.0, 2000000  Compared to just 8 Lucid Dreaming: 8 Lucid Deck Average observations, 6.869565217391305, 7.55139465217407, 7.956521739130435, 0.01755307365986903, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 1, 6.070831000000122, 8, 1.1222064694389902, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 1.8116400000000457, 7, 1.0956430104000274, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.11752899999999433, 3, 0.11016793415900206, 2000000  8 Lucid, 3 rescue, 8 lucid, 3 Rescue sequence: Deck Average observations, 7.488372093023256, 8.252793085266644, 8.894736842105264, 0.027364050029070237, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 5, 11.428286999999216, 16, 1.821542245630927, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 2.9349590000000334, 8, 1.4945471683190013, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.0, 0, 0.0, 2000000  compared to 16 Lucid: 16 Lucid Deck Average observations, 7.2105263157894735, 8.199056644736462, 8.894736842105264, 0.03928537531630487, 2000000 Overall Weak removed, 5, 11.430367000000277, 16, 1.821255745311055, 2000000 Overall moderate removed, 0, 4.2648834999997725, 11, 1.8245522314277685, 2000000 Overall severe removed, 0, 0.30474949999997664, 4, 0.2706437422497696, 2000000  That's with just the simple logic of '8 Lucid Dreaming and up to three rescues of above average cards' each turn. 4 minutes ago, ShinChan said: Also, reached a certain point, it's interesting to consider the cards in hand, since starting in T3 (with 5-7 LD each turn) you're most likely saving high cards. It's easier to just remember that you can do better than the sim if you're keeping high cards out of circulation.  And, like I said, I don't think there's any statistical difference between "You can't flip that card because it's in your hand" and "That card's on the rear half of the deck."  So I'm just going to assume the effect is within whatever error is caused by not doing anything close to the full permutation space.   I mean, some of these sequences have four or five deck shuffles in them; and I'm only doing 200,000 iterations.  This is all relying on praying to the gods of Monte Carlo that the sim is blessed with good sampling.  2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmoar Posted December 4, 2019 Report Share Posted December 4, 2019 On 8/6/2019 at 4:02 PM, Maniacal_cackle said: Oh, good point! So can't even dart out? Unless I am missing something, looks like you can place the Bandersnatch into base contact with a web marker within 12", use your bonus action to Crawl Into Shadow against an enemy within 6" (burying yourself), then Dart Out next to that same enemy (giving you a free melee attack), and then 1 more action after that. Still quite a bit of distance travelled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniacal_cackle Posted December 5, 2019 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2019 2 hours ago, farmoar said: Unless I am missing something, looks like you can place the Bandersnatch into base contact with a web marker within 12", use your bonus action to Crawl Into Shadow against an enemy within 6" (burying yourself), then Dart Out next to that same enemy (giving you a free melee attack), and then 1 more action after that. Still quite a bit of distance travelled. You can't take actions while buried. The thing that allows a Bandersnatch to do it is the text that says if it is buried at the start of its activation, it can do things while buried that turn. If it doesn't start buried, it can't take actions once it buries (which is mechanically super clunky. You can't bury then attack??) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShinChan Posted December 6, 2019 Report Share Posted December 6, 2019 Some data using 6 Lucid Dreams each turn. More than that seems unrealistic. The column with Tx L/M/S is the amount of Low/Moderate/Severe cards removed at the beginning of each turn. I'm not taking into account the hand (soon) or flips (too complicate to simulate). Fiendish Gamble only returns card values that are over the current average, for example in turn 1-2 returns anything that is 8+ and in turns 3-4 only cards above 9. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solkan Posted December 7, 2019 Report Share Posted December 7, 2019 In today's installment of 'Solkan learns Python', or 'Stats don't feel real until a computer has run trials for an hour' Theatre, I was getting bugged by what what Lucid Dreaming card removal distribution looked like. Out of ten million trials, using strictly "Remove the lowest non-joker card of the three from play", after 4 repetitions of Lucid Dreaming frequently are each category of card removed: Weak: 0:    16,004 1:   330,521 2: 2,036,216 3: 4,523,311 4: 3,093,948 Moderate: 0:  3,373,748 1:  4,488,775  2:  1,849,138 3:    275,947 4:     12,392 Severe: 0:  9,419,962 1:    573,236 2:      6,780 3:         22 4:          * (No observations) On a clean deck, just performing Lucid Dreaming once, no hand given, what are the frequencies of card removal:  10,000,000 trials Removed a weak card:     7,591,412 times Removed a moderate card: 2,261,537 times Removed a severe card:      147,051 times So, there's the ball park of how unlikely it is to be forced into the situation of discarding a severe card when you don't want to:  Less than the odds of rolling a fumble in D&D if you have a fresh deck, although about a 1/4 chance of discarding a moderate card. When I first heard about this action, I got it in my head that if you had a hand full of low cards, the results would feel bad. I reran the sim to leave out the four aces in the deck (it's the start of the turn, you draw four aces), and then what happens when you use Lucid Dreaming.  The machine says you get this: Removed a weak card:  6,947,505 Removed a moderate:   2,867,300 Removed a severe:       185,195 out of 10,000,000 trials. When I first read about Lucid Dreaming, I thought it would do very bad things if the player had a hand of low cards.  I think I really overestimated the effect of removing four cards from a deck of 54.  🤔    Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myyrä Posted December 7, 2019 Report Share Posted December 7, 2019 You don't really need o computer simulation to reach the conclusion that having to remove a severe is very rare. The probability of having to remove a severe, is the same as drawing 3 severe cards or jokers from a deck = 14/54 * 13/53 * 12/52 ≈ 0.0147 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.