Misplaced Pages

Talk:Dice: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:14, 10 July 2021 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,812 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Dice/Archive 1) (bot← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:20, 8 November 2024 edit undo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,549 edits Probability theory: ReplyTag: Reply 
(33 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skip to talk}} {{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header}} {{Talk header}}
{{Vital article
| topic = Life
| level = 4
| class = C
}}
{{Article history {{Article history
| action1 = FAC | action1 = FAC
Line 30: Line 25:
| topic = sports | topic = sports
}} }}
{{WikiProject banner shell|1 = {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1 =
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|old-user-1=Quadell|old-date-1=13:47, 29 September 2013|old-user-2=Greatpopcorn|old-date-2= 01:13, 13 November 2013}} {{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|old-user-1=Quadell|old-date-1=13:47, 29 September 2013|old-user-2=Greatpopcorn|old-date-2= 01:13, 13 November 2013}}
{{WikiProject Board and table games|class=C|importance=Top}} {{WikiProject Board and table games|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Role-playing games|class=C|importance=High}} {{WikiProject Role-playing games|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons|class=C|importance=Mid {{WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons| importance = Mid}}
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = no
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = <yes/no>
| b3 <!--Structure --> = yes
| b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = <yes/no>
| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes
| b6 <!--Accessibility --> = <yes/no>}}
{{WP1.0
| class =
C
| importance =
Low
| b1 =
| b2 =
| b3 =
| b4 =
| b5 =
| b6 =
| category =
everydaylife
| WPCD =
| v0.5 =
| v0.7 =
pass
| v1.0 =
| VA =
| core =
| coresup =
| listas =
| small =
}} }}
}}
{{auto archiving notice|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=90|dounreplied=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K |maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 1 |counter = 2
|minthreadsleft = 4 |minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |minthreadstoarchive = 1
Line 91: Line 41:
}} }}


== Augustus and Tacitus dates == == fair and less fair ==

How about splitting the "Rarer" table into isohedral (including "long" dice) and other? ] (]) 05:30, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

:I'm curious how that would look. ] (]) 13:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
::Most of the non-isohedral dice have the word "truncated" in the table. All ]s, all ]s and ], and (effectively) all long dice are isohedral. ] (]) 05:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)


== Die or Dice ==
Comment to https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/2601:249:8A00:2500:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031


For articles like ], ], ] and many others, the article title is singular, though several of the objects are usually used together.
I added the dates because they show that Augustus died 42 years before Tacitus was born, and therefore COULDN’T have written a letter to him. I presume it’s a mangling of an actual fact, which some other editor may be able to supply. I modified the article rather than simply commenting here, as I have observed that Talk page comments are far less likely now to result in action to correct an article than was the case 15 years ago. ] (]) 06:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
:So... you're just going to leave in the article what you consider to be an error, but actually making it worse by making it look silly? In the hopes that maybe someone will eventually come along and fix it? Do you have access to the cited source to see if the error is in the source, or in the person adding the source to the article? ] (]) 11:51, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
::Easy now... I agree with ] that something's got to be fixed; I agree with the IP6-user above that leaving nonsense in the article is not the best way to go about it. There's nothing wrong with pointing out an inconsistency without having the sources to put it right, but the way to go about it is
::#Remove the nonsense with a sensible edit summary;
::#and/or write a talk page post about the problem (and I do not agree it doesn't work, not on a fairly well watched article like this one - but of course it may take a little time)
::#or, of course, doing the work, finding the sources needed, and fixing it.
::For now, I've removed the statement entirely - viz.
:::''Dicing was even a popular pastime of emperors. Letters by ] to ] and his daughter recount his hobby of dicing. ''
::or, in Koro Neils version, highlighting the inconsistency,
:::''Dicing was even a popular pastime of emperors. Letters by ] (died 14 AD) to ] (born ca 56 AD) and his daughter recount his hobby of dicing.''
::--] (]) 21:37, 14 October 2019 (UTC)


For dice, the singular can be ''die'' or ''dice'' and the plural is ''dice''. Thus, the title ] could be either, but the start of the article makes it seem to be plural:
I think that's a good solution until we have a solid source that discusses what Roman emperors actually did with dice. :) ] (]) 23:23, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
:'''''Dice''' (sg.: '''die''' or '''dice''') are small, throwable objects ...''
(my point being: this only makes sense if the first word is understood as plural).
This is kind of odd, I think. Would this be better?
:''A '''die''' (sg. die or '''dice''', pl. '''dice''') is a small, throwable object ...
Logically, one might say this should go with renaming the article ], but I wouldn't support renaming.
Also, given title ], this would be more logical:
:''A '''dice''' (sg. dice or '''die''', pl. '''dice''') is a small, throwable object ...
but I actually prefer my first version. Or perhaps this:
:''A '''die''' (sg. also '''dice''', pl. '''dice''') is a small, throwable object ...
Thoughts? ] (]) 08:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)


:I support: A '''dice''' ({{singular}} dice or ''' die'''; {{plural form}} dice) is a small, throwable object... <span style="font-family:cursive;color:DarkBlue;cursor:help"><span>]</span><sup>(])</sup></span> 08:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
== Polyhedral Dice Dating ==
::That would be logical, yes!
::Arguably, with that lead, it would be odd that we throughout the article use the singular '''die''', and I don't think we should change that, which is why I prefer "A die (...) is".
::(We use "die" 73 times and "dice" 129 times, and though I haven't checked all 129 instances, it seems that when we use "dice" it is either plural or dice as a concept, where using the plural form is at least possible.) ] (]) 10:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
:::Only idiots use dice as a singular.--] (]) (]) 18:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Why would you want to be so rude? Both forms are correct. ] (]) 16:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)


== Where, if at all, to put basic stat info for nDs dice ==
The section on polyhedral dice opens with saying "Around the end of the 1960's"; implying that this is the origin of polyhedral dice. However, this is clearly contrasted by the image of the d20 from Ptolemaic Egypt earlier in the article. I don't know much on the topic so will refrain from editing, but there seems to be something astray. ] (]) 09:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
:That line does not imply anything about the origin of polyhedral dice, only about a the starting point of a modern tradition ("Around the end of the 1960s, non-cubical dice became popular among players of wargames"). "Became popular" ≠ "came into existence". The sentence is technically correct, but not really helpful. The following sentence ("The numerals 6 and 9, which are reciprocally symmetric through rotation, are typically distinguished with a dot or underline.") is about a design detail only relevant to dice with our Arabic numerals, and feels misplaced (or could just be deleted).
:In Ptolemaic and Roman antiquity, both icosahedra (d20) and pentagonal dodecahedra (d12 with pentagonal faces) were known, but far less common than the cubical d6. Other shapes are even less common from these times and regions. The tetrahedra from the Royal Game of Ur are well-known today, but the four-sided and two-sided stick dice from Ur and Ancient Egypt are less well-known (although more common in their own time for all I know). Some ancient chinese dice are 18-sided (and 14-sided, I think?), and we know about 7-sided, 8-sided, and 14-sided dice from medieval Europe (again, insignificant compared to the widespread d6).
:10-sided dice only came up in the late 19th century IIRC.
:The 1960s brought polyhedral ''sets'' into games. Again, the d10 was a late-comer (not a Platonic solid) and only became part of polyhedral sets in the 1980s.
:There is no encompassing, in-depth study about the history of polyhedral dice. I'm still collecting bits and bits of information from diverse sources. There's no simple reference you could slap into the article to cover this stuff. --] (]) 13:34, 18 December 2019 (UTC)


A while back, related to some research I was doing, I needed to gather some basic info about the results you get when rolling nDs+c and nDs-c dice -- It discussed the minimum value, maximum value, and most likely value(s) you get for particular nm s and c, including when the adjusted rolls would result in a negative value. This info has been useful for my fellow gamers, and I think it would be of interest to other d20 players, as well as those interested in dice probability, and perhaps probability more generally. As far as I was able to discover, this info is not grouped together in one place on the Web -- or, if it is, I could not find after a lot of googling.
:: While it doesn't say anything outright, I personally believe that the absence of a statement referring to a time before the 1960's does /imply/ that that was close to their origin, but I accept that you're more knowledgeable on the subject than I am and I defer to you.] (]) 00:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
::: If it's misleading, we should change it. Does it sound better now? --] (]) 09:35, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
::::I think you phrased it well. Polyhedral dice are certainly more popular now than in any time in history afaict, and that can be directly attributed to the rise of tabletop games, RPGs especially (and D&D in particular). ] (]) 17:18, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


I've been told by a knowledgeable editor that such info is too detailed for the Dice page. Dice Notation was suggested as a location for it, but that page is about (several different) dice notations, and doesn't really get into the probability behavior of info related to them (sensible; the page is about notation, not stats). It also seems inappropriate to place this info on its own page; seems too detailed for that. So, I'd like the community's input: Is there an appropriate page for this info? Should it be on a new page after all? Or it is just too esoteric to be in Misplaced Pages?
== "Infinite" sets of dice ==


Many thanks for your advice! ] (]) 23:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
I don't think disphenoids can be described as an infinite set, since surely they are all the same shape but with different dimensions. Bipyramids and similar sets clearly are infinite sets, since even though they have different dimensions they also have different numbers of faces. ] (]) 15:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
:It seems disphenoids can be inscribed in a rectangular box with a square base. The height of the box, relative to the side of the base, is a shape parameter - not merely a dimension. So I've undone your edit. PS: See image at ].--] (]) 19:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)


== Probability theory ==
== Uncommon odd-numbered dice ==


Obviously, ] is not something we should get into detalis about in this article. However, I think one, reading this article, should be no more than a click or two away from getting info about the relevant probability theory when throwing e.g. two identical dice, or two differently coloured dice, simultaneously. Perhaps it can be fixed by adding an appropriate link in the section ], but I'm not sure how, or what to link. Ideas? ] (]) 12:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
There seems to be little mention of less commonly manufactured dice in higher odd-numbered ranges, such as They are uncommon, seemingly existing for novelty, but many of them are not described or listed on the page, and deserve, IMO, mention due to their rarity and the unique challenges of making odd-numbered dice.


:I added a brief paragraph to the "Use" section, linking to probability theory. I agree, it should be somewhere in the article, and this looked like a good spot to me. ] (]) 06:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
] (]) 23:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
::Thanks! ] (]) 08:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:20, 8 November 2024

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dice article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Former good articleDice was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 22, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 28, 2005Good article nomineeListed
April 22, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article
This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
Previous copyedits:
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Quadell on 13:47, 29 September 2013.
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Greatpopcorn on 01:13, 13 November 2013.
WikiProject iconBoard and table games Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconRole-playing games High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconDungeons & Dragons Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Dungeons & Dragons WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dungeons & Dragons-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, or join the discussion, where you can join the project and find out how to help!Dungeons & DragonsWikipedia:WikiProject Dungeons & DragonsTemplate:WikiProject Dungeons & DragonsDungeons & Dragons
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
D&D to-do:

view


Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

fair and less fair

How about splitting the "Rarer" table into isohedral (including "long" dice) and other? —Tamfang (talk) 05:30, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm curious how that would look. BOZ (talk) 13:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Most of the non-isohedral dice have the word "truncated" in the table. All Catalan solids, all bipyramids and trapezohedra, and (effectively) all long dice are isohedral. —Tamfang (talk) 05:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Die or Dice

For articles like Token, Chess piece, Coin and many others, the article title is singular, though several of the objects are usually used together.

For dice, the singular can be die or dice and the plural is dice. Thus, the title Dice could be either, but the start of the article makes it seem to be plural:

Dice (sg.: die or dice) are small, throwable objects ...

(my point being: this only makes sense if the first word is understood as plural). This is kind of odd, I think. Would this be better?

A die (sg. die or dice, pl. dice) is a small, throwable object ...

Logically, one might say this should go with renaming the article Die, but I wouldn't support renaming. Also, given title Dice, this would be more logical:

A dice (sg. dice or die, pl. dice) is a small, throwable object ...

but I actually prefer my first version. Or perhaps this:

A die (sg. also dice, pl. dice) is a small, throwable object ...

Thoughts? (talk) 08:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I support: A dice (sg. dice or die; pl. dice) is a small, throwable object... Alexeyevitch 08:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
That would be logical, yes!
Arguably, with that lead, it would be odd that we throughout the article use the singular die, and I don't think we should change that, which is why I prefer "A die (...) is".
(We use "die" 73 times and "dice" 129 times, and though I haven't checked all 129 instances, it seems that when we use "dice" it is either plural or dice as a concept, where using the plural form is at least possible.) (talk) 10:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Only idiots use dice as a singular.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 18:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Why would you want to be so rude? Both forms are correct. (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Where, if at all, to put basic stat info for nDs dice

A while back, related to some research I was doing, I needed to gather some basic info about the results you get when rolling nDs+c and nDs-c dice -- It discussed the minimum value, maximum value, and most likely value(s) you get for particular nm s and c, including when the adjusted rolls would result in a negative value. This info has been useful for my fellow gamers, and I think it would be of interest to other d20 players, as well as those interested in dice probability, and perhaps probability more generally. As far as I was able to discover, this info is not grouped together in one place on the Web -- or, if it is, I could not find after a lot of googling.

I've been told by a knowledgeable editor that such info is too detailed for the Dice page. Dice Notation was suggested as a location for it, but that page is about (several different) dice notations, and doesn't really get into the probability behavior of info related to them (sensible; the page is about notation, not stats). It also seems inappropriate to place this info on its own page; seems too detailed for that. So, I'd like the community's input: Is there an appropriate page for this info? Should it be on a new page after all? Or it is just too esoteric to be in Misplaced Pages?

Many thanks for your advice! Eclectucator (talk) 23:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Probability theory

Obviously, probability theory is not something we should get into detalis about in this article. However, I think one, reading this article, should be no more than a click or two away from getting info about the relevant probability theory when throwing e.g. two identical dice, or two differently coloured dice, simultaneously. Perhaps it can be fixed by adding an appropriate link in the section Dice#Use, but I'm not sure how, or what to link. Ideas? (talk) 12:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I added a brief paragraph to the "Use" section, linking to probability theory. I agree, it should be somewhere in the article, and this looked like a good spot to me. Fieari (talk) 06:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! (talk) 08:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Categories: