Originally Posted by mrfuji3
This is a good start @Saberem, but you need more than 100 rolls to determine if there is actually a statistical difference between BG3 rolls and randomness. Your non-weighted results produce a Chi^2 of 20.8, and your weighted-results produce a Chi^2 of 24.8. Both of these are below the 95% confidence value of 30.14, and thus we can't conclude that either of these distributions is different than a totally random distribution.

When I add this to @DragonSnooz's weighted-dataset (608 total rolls), the dataset is still indistinguishable from an even distribution (Chi^2 of 16.2, less than the 95% confidence value of 30.14). There are only 2 values that differ from expectation at >3-sigma: 6 (18 rolls out of an expected 30, for a 5-sigma difference) and 17 (40 rolls when we expect 30, for a 3-sigma difference).

...which is a bit odd to me, tbh. This is the weighted-roll dataset, and thus it should be different than an even distribution. Maybe I'm doing the stats wrong?
@DragonSnooz, the "Normal Attack Rolls (Player)" data you posted earlier in this page was for weighted rolls, right?
Yes, all the data in that post is for weighted rolls. If weighted dice only function to reduce streaks, then it should become an even distribution faster than Larian's true random.

Here is the chart from patch 3 (unweighted).

Last edited by DragonSnooz; 16/03/21 09:42 PM.