I once played with a guy who used dice made from machined steel. They were beautiful. Ten thousand rolls with near perfect distribution across the board. I wish I knew whwre he got them from.
I just received my set of OptiDice, which inspired me to check how numerically balanced the rest of my dice were. I was shocked how other than OptiDice, every dice set has 5-8 on the same side of the d8 and 7-12 on the same side of the d12. And a few sets didn't even make sure opposite sides added to 9 or 13 (respectively)! Numerical balancing needs to become the standard.
For the D20, I wonder if it would be possible to do some weird calculus magic to figure out the exact area of the regular, non-hexagon-font number indentations then change the sizes of those so each side is the same weight actually nevermind that sounds like a CAD nightmare
The CAD for that wouldn't actually be that hard. There are functions to provide the volume and area of objects, a font would be nothing different. Might look weird with all the different sizes, but its very doable.
@SECRETS An imparity in ink will be less impactful than an imparity in material, as way less ink is necessary to convey the number than material that has to be removed.
If you can find a font with variable boldness you could use some sort of area calculator and slowly change the boldness of each of the numbers until they all match, equal area should mean equal material
The hexagons are for ease of proving the sides are equal. Even the triangle version in the top comment could be proved fairly quickly with just isometric graph paper and a pencil.
@@Leadvest I get the methodology behind the hexagons but using variable size and/or boldness or even just etching extra designs around the outside of the numbers would look far better and have the same effect
For some reason my d8 is numbered with opposing pairs not adding up to 9. 1 and 2 are opposite, 3 and 4 are opposite, 5 and 6 are opposite, 7 and 8 are opposite. All my other non-d4 dice from the same set follow the rule (if we treat the 0 on the d10 as a 0 rather than 10 for the maths) so I have no idea why this is set up like this.
You forgot the new designs. For the d4's case, it is supposed to be a truncated tetrahedron, made from hexagons for the triangles and triangles for the vertices of regular tetrahedra. You may still keep the number of hexagons the same on all sides so it stays fair.
Wouldn't one way to address the D20 be to use 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09 for the first 9 numbers? It still wouldn't be perfectly balanced, but seems like it would be *more* balanced?
Instead of taking out some number of hexagons, can't you just scale all the numbers to have the same area and thus remove the same amount of material, and then center their mass on the face? That way you can get easily legible non blocky numbers even at small scales.
If you had them both as D10s, which you can, you'd need to remember to take 10 from the total to prevent the maximum from being 110%, and the minimum from being 11%
I can't convince The Game Crafter that their d12s aren't mathematically balanced, so I have to sell my d12-based games sans dice, which has brought complaints. Hopefully this video will convince them like I couldn't.
There are d100's. They just aren't usually used because they tend to be hard to read because it can be difficult to tell exactly which surface is at the top.
@@kramenisfalling I have one... heck, they're fun to have, so everyone in my group has bought one at one time or another. The trouble isn't reading the top face... it's that they're nearly spherical and have trouble stopping. You roll it, and it just keeps rolling, and rolling, and rolling. It's nearly like rolling a golf ball.
why even bother with hexagonal designs? just calculate the area of the number and thicken it accordingly. finding a center of mass of a 2d shape is easy enough too.
A blessing from the algorithm
All hail the algorithm
All hail the algorithm
All hail the algorithm
All hail the algorithm
May the algorithm be upon thee
I once played with a guy who used dice made from machined steel. They were beautiful. Ten thousand rolls with near perfect distribution across the board. I wish I knew whwre he got them from.
@@lindenhoch8396 as even as the ten thousand rolls.
I just received my set of OptiDice, which inspired me to check how numerically balanced the rest of my dice were. I was shocked how other than OptiDice, every dice set has 5-8 on the same side of the d8 and 7-12 on the same side of the d12. And a few sets didn't even make sure opposite sides added to 9 or 13 (respectively)! Numerical balancing needs to become the standard.
For the D20, I wonder if it would be possible to do some weird calculus magic to figure out the exact area of the regular, non-hexagon-font number indentations then change the sizes of those so each side is the same weight
actually nevermind that sounds like a CAD nightmare
@@bearweston8350 No
The CAD for that wouldn't actually be that hard. There are functions to provide the volume and area of objects, a font would be nothing different. Might look weird with all the different sizes, but its very doable.
I'm imagining that the indented numbering adds an absolute error, and simply inking the hexagons on the surface would be better.
@SECRETS An imparity in ink will be less impactful than an imparity in material, as way less ink is necessary to convey the number than material that has to be removed.
I was looking at the 6's (because they are the 8's minus one dot) and saw the issue, but I'm glad you fixed it
Hexagons are the bestagons
Truth has been spoken
A cgp grey fan I see
@@figo3554 the fun part is I haven't even watched that video (^-^ )
I only read the title and it stuck with me
@@Flymerickit's a fun watch. Check it out lol
If you can find a font with variable boldness you could use some sort of area calculator and slowly change the boldness of each of the numbers until they all match, equal area should mean equal material
The hexagons are for ease of proving the sides are equal. Even the triangle version in the top comment could be proved fairly quickly with just isometric graph paper and a pencil.
@@Leadvest I get the methodology behind the hexagons but using variable size and/or boldness or even just etching extra designs around the outside of the numbers would look far better and have the same effect
I had the same thought about borders.
For some reason my d8 is numbered with opposing pairs not adding up to 9.
1 and 2 are opposite, 3 and 4 are opposite, 5 and 6 are opposite, 7 and 8 are opposite.
All my other non-d4 dice from the same set follow the rule (if we treat the 0 on the d10 as a 0 rather than 10 for the maths) so I have no idea why this is set up like this.
I still need to get a set of these!
Use a two shot moulding with the numbers in one coloured plastic an the body in an identical plastic of a different colour, no balance problems.
You forgot the new designs. For the d4's case, it is supposed to be a truncated tetrahedron, made from hexagons for the triangles and triangles for the vertices of regular tetrahedra. You may still keep the number of hexagons the same on all sides so it stays fair.
The D20 looks pretty bad by looking so different from the others. Even if you couldn't be exact you still should've had a hexagonal font.
Great project! How do these compare to Casino Dice?
Wouldn't one way to address the D20 be to use 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09 for the first 9 numbers? It still wouldn't be perfectly balanced, but seems like it would be *more* balanced?
Only dice i personally trust for dnd.
Instead of taking out some number of hexagons, can't you just scale all the numbers to have the same area and thus remove the same amount of material, and then center their mass on the face? That way you can get easily legible non blocky numbers even at small scales.
dye sublimation ?
Why not just cut the hexagons in half to make 19?
the two d10s are: 0-9 and 1-10.
Am i right?
Yep, a d10 and a d%.
Can roll between [0,1] and [9,10] for a total of 1% or 100% (or anything in between)
If you had them both as D10s, which you can, you'd need to remember to take 10 from the total to prevent the maximum from being 110%, and the minimum from being 11%
I can't convince The Game Crafter that their d12s aren't mathematically balanced, so I have to sell my d12-based games sans dice, which has brought complaints. Hopefully this video will convince them like I couldn't.
Thank you for soothing me to 😴
“Hexa-guns”
you shouldnt have rounded the edges for better balanced dice
I go to the website and I only see d10's
We'll have the website updated in a couple of days!
Thanks! I can't wait to play some pathfinders with these.
Laser the legends and there’d be no perceptible difference in weight of each side.
Is someone going to make a d100 like in isaac?
There are d100's. They just aren't usually used because they tend to be hard to read because it can be difficult to tell exactly which surface is at the top.
@@kramenisfalling I have one... heck, they're fun to have, so everyone in my group has bought one at one time or another. The trouble isn't reading the top face... it's that they're nearly spherical and have trouble stopping. You roll it, and it just keeps rolling, and rolling, and rolling. It's nearly like rolling a golf ball.
@@Fieari it would stop in a dice tray
@@Fieari they’re also quite biased and aren’t nearly as fair as a percentile die and a d10
why even bother with hexagonal designs? just calculate the area of the number and thicken it accordingly. finding a center of mass of a 2d shape is easy enough too.
Cool.
Nice, algorith coment
instead of 10 hexagons why dont you just use infinite so its smooth i dont know why you chose 10
🤔
...
Weight distribution.
bruh he explained why its a fixed number
@@Known_as_The_Ghost you can still distribute the weight with as many points as you like
@@incription The video already explained.
I'm not going to be dealing with your ignorance, sorry.
I was the 100th like WOOOOOO
Okay.
But.
Make the 20 look the same as the rest.
inb4 someone makes RGB dice
d&d night boutta look like a pride parade