Ideal Free Distribution Puns

I was reviewing the species list and wondered what people thought about the various stat distributions.

For example, the Pantoran's base statblock is: 2 Brawn 2 Agility 2 Intelligence 2 Cunning 1 Willpower 3 Presence

Arranged lowest-to-highest: 122223

With 110 investable experience and potentially another 15 experience from obligation, you could create these statblocks:

222225 (110 exp.)

122235 (110 exp. + 10 exp.)

122244 (110 exp.)

222334 (110 exp. + 10 exp.)

223333 (110 exp.)

133333 (110 exp. + 10 exp.)

Of course, not every species gets 110 base experience, but you get the idea.

What do you think is the "ideal" statblock? Do you like the jack-of-all-trades distribution, or the min-maxed distribution? Which one suits your playstyle the best?

Personally, I like the look of 122235 and 133333.

I've been able to make some builds with stat distributions that I like, but just wondering what other people do.

This is a thought experiment that occurred to me a couple of years ago, one that might shed some light on different teachers’/professors’ pedagogical choices and assumptions (ones we might not even be aware we have). I found my colleagues’ answers informative and helpful in appreciating our different styles and ideas, and so I’d like to extend the question or experiment to everyone here. Thanks in advance for your replies!

So here goes.

Imagine you are a flawless or perfect teacher (you get to decide what precisely that means but I think it should include being free of any obstacles or limitations that currently keep or have ever kept you from pursuing/exercising/improving a teaching strategy).

Under this assumption, what would the distribution of your course’s grades look like? Do you think it would be a normal distribution or do you think it would be a uniform all As distribution? Something else? More importantly, why do you think this?

So my question is regarding the wages a worker, or different workers would receive. The old conservative stereotype is that "jAnItOrS wOuLd eArN tHe sAmE aS dOcToRs", and whenever this is mentioned I am somewhat unsure how to respond. On the one side, while both of these jobs are important for the society as a whole, the doctor goes through much more training, has a greater responsibility (e.g. end of life decisions, COVID-Triage, etc.) and arguably has a greater impact on communities as a whole, therefore an argument could be made that because of these "burdens" doctors should be earning more than janitors. On the other hand both work hard and the janitor may also have wanted to become a doctor, but just did not cut it academically, should he therefore be dammned into earning less?

I am aware of Marx´ theory in the comment on the Gotha programme where he supposedly said that complete wage equality just gives rise to a new form of inequality. I am also aware of the principle "from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution", but how do we decide what is a greater contribution than something else?

For example if we would democratically bring the change to socialism tomorrow, should we cut each doctors salary and redistribute it to janitors, or use it for something different alltogether?

Let me first say that I don’t think a person’s Kibbe has anything to do with their talent. I would just like to know what is your ideal Kibbe type distribution in a group.

For me:

A bg: TR, SC, SN, SD, FG, DC, FN, D

A gg: R, TR, SC, SG, FG, DC, FN, SD

It obviously dependes on the players you have and their injuries but all things being equal:

QB: 1

RB: 7

WR: 5

TE: 1

D/ST: 1

K: 1

Could see the argument for 2 QB's if you don't have an elite one and/or everyone in your league has two for some reason.

I thought I'd lay this out here in case anyone else wanted to use it in any of their designs mainly because I felt like overcame such a large hurdle after spending many many hours search for the ideal dice distribution for the current RPG home brew system I was working on.

What is an ideal dice distribution, well that is hard to quantify but I had three primary goals to get what I was looking for:

1. A bell curve, with a d20 your chance of getting a 1 is equal to getting a 20, however with something like 2d6 your chance is getting a 7 is much higher than getting a 2 or 12.
2. The average, at the "zenith" of the bell curve, is a better number with the more skill a character has. In short, your average number after rolling improves as a character's stats improve.
3. The curve gets steeper as the skill improves. Basically, a character becomes more consistent, where an inexperienced character is more random, i.e. a flatter curve.

Basically, I wanted something that easily allowed a character to become less consistent and random over time all while improving their "accuracy".

Getting the Bell Curve

This was a fairly easy step to achieve. All you need to do is roll multiple dice and add them together, as we saw with the 2d6 example. You may think a dice pool could also achieve this, however it severely tapers off the more dice you add and while it is a curve it isn't a bell curve. Though, I didn't rule it out, yet.

Improving the average

This was probably the easiest step; there are multiple ways of doing it: modifiers, more dice, or changing the amount of sides on a die. So I tried all of them but only one helped me with...

Going from less consistent to more consistent

To have a characters consistency improve over time proved to be the wall that I could not seem to get over. And apparently, through online searching I found that it seems to be a common issue. But I chugged away, using anydice.com

The Solution

It all came down to this: change the amount of sides on a die as a character improves. However, the more sides you add the more inconsistent the dice are. So, naturally, all I had to do is go against the RPG grain: you have to roll low.

So in the end I ended up with a system where you roll 3 dice: one for your attribute, your skill, and one for your general proficiency (which may change to represent something else eventually), and each is ranked from d12 to d4. I went with 3 dice because it seem

I guess Debian Sid with sysvinit sort of counts? And when I say fully free, I mean Linux Libre, or something without non-free blobs or whatever. Also, please don't try to convince me that Systemd is great, that's not really the purpose of this thread.

My car is a mitsubishi express 2.4L petrol. I just weighed it today and it weighs 1'800 KG (1870 KG with driver) with my two auxillary batteries and the starter battery, and a 20L water tank. Starterbattery sits infront, more or less exactly below the passenger seat. The engine is located between passenger and driver seat in this car. Its a RWD. Then you have the driver seat with driver of course. Behind the driver seat, pretty much in the center (of the right-hand side) of the car, I have my two auxillary batteries sitting, so 40kgs in total. I.e. the default load on my car is distributed more or less like this:

Front:

Left: ~15kg (starter batt)

Right: 70-80KG (driver)

Middle:

Left: storage.. max 10 KG random stuff

Center (underbed storage): lets say 40KG storage total

Right: Auxillary batts, 2x20KG

Back:

Left: Water Tank (20L / 20KG)

Right: Pullout ktichen, small fridge, crockery etc.. I would say no more than 25KG

TOTAL:

Left: 45KG (without passenger)

Center: 40KG

Right: ~145KG

I am also going to add 2x15KG worth of solar panels, new total weight will then be 1830, or 1900ish with driver...so I am trying to figure out what would the best setup be, obviously with the way my van is setup currently, I would place those solar panels on the roof on the left-hand side. I.e. align them in a row to add 30KG to the left side on the front/middle section of the car.

But still, there is a huge difference:

Left: 75KG (without passenger, with ..140ish KG)

Center: 40KG

Right: 145KG

Is this fine, should I change anything? Maybe try to move one auxillary battery towards the left side or have it sit in the center ( I have an underbed stoarge in my van that I could use to store one of the auxillary batts, however, it just seems like a lot of work moving it there. Thus, I would only do this if I really have something to gain, in terms of efficiency handling of the car. Or for safety reasons (breaks).

After looking at their kits, what are early thoughts for ISO class breakdowns for each Pym Tech character?

This is more of a general question about the breakdown of starting points and chip denominations for people who play HK style. In the past I simply used 3 colors, one for 2, one for 10, one for 20 and gave people a breakdown of 200-300 each. However, there are probably more ideal ways to do it and I've had my eye on some mini poker chips for a while that come in a variety of colors. What chip breakdowns do your groups use? In the case of the faan-laak table our group uses, the max a hand scores is 96 points but I know in several other variants and rulesets it can go far higher and wanted to have enough chips to be versatile. Thanks in advance!

(PS, this isn't a question about riichi, I have a gadgillion point stick sets but I felt like chips would be more appropriate for HK style given that they're usually included in sets and my folding table has drawers for them)

I've got a RWD kit car (a Dutton Melos for those interested), and I'm going to take it trialling - basically driving it up steep/ bumpy/ muddy hills.

Maximising grip seems to be the key factor to doing well, and I cant find any solid info on what kind of weight distribution/ centre of gravity I should be aiming for.

Also, there are limits to how much I can modify the suspension, but should I be looking for more or less stiffness?

Any advice appreciated!

Hi all, IT team of 2 for a small business. We are looking to move away from our Windows 2016 server that is currently hosting our servers via Hyper-V. Ideally we are just looking for an option that plays nice with each other, and there seems to be several options for us to go down this path. Any particular opinions or personal experience with CentOS/Debian/Ubuntu? Thanks!

Now that the quarter is coming to an end and we're all thinking about what we should have done over the past 9 weeks, I want to ask: What do you think is the ideal TA office hour distribution? That is, suppose that a TA will have a total of 2 office hours/week. Do you prefer:

1. having all 2 hours in one day, in one continuous chunk? or

2. having 1 hour/day on two different days?

If the latter, do you prefer the days to be serial (e.g. Tuesday and Wednesday), or do you prefer gaps between them (e.g. Monday and Thursday)?

In any case, are there preferences time-wise (morning, early/late afternoon)? Or does it really just depend quarter-by-quarter on you course schedule?

Like many, I was very disappointed in some of the moveset choices Niantic made for some generation IV Pokemon, notably Heatran and my personal all time favorite legendary, Giratina. I became curious about the overall direction Niantic took in assigning movesets, as some Pokemon actually received very good outcomes, like Electivire and Mamoswine. I listed all final forms of generation IV Pokemon with their moveset as well as their best possible moveset, or ideal moveset in order to aggregate the overall treatment of moveset assignments. First, I’ll lay out some interesting things I noticed, then I’ll insert the list I created. Note that the category a Pokemon is placed in (Ideal/Viable/Unviable/Non-existent) is subjective, and so even I was slightly conflicted about some of the choices I made. That being said, there is room to disagree with some placements in this list and I am interested to see what you guys think about it! What do you all think about the general trend uncovered by this study?

Conclusions:

Overall:

Ideal Moveset: 30%

Viable Moveset: 29%

Unviable Moveset: 26%

Non-existent/Unuseable Moveset: 15%

Ideal+Viable: 59%

Unviable+Non-existent/Unuseable: 41%

~3:2 good vs. bad movesets

-Largest group is Ideal

Legendaries+Mythicals:

Ideal Moveset: 20%

Viable Moveset: 30%

Unviable Moveset: 40%

Non-existent/Unuseabe Moveset: 10%

Ideal+Viable: 50%

Unviable+Non-existent: 50%

1:1 good vs bad movesets

-Largest group is Unviable

Additional:

-Electric type has most Pokemon in Ideal; all Electric types in Ideal

-Ground & Normal types tie for most Pokemon in Non-existent

-Fairy, Fire, Ground, & Normal types have none in Ideal

-The only Legendaries/Mythicals in Ideal are Psychic type (Emotion Trio+Cesselia)

Criteria:

Legend:

-Pokemon are ordered in each group alphabetically by type

-Dual typing Pokemon are counted as two separate Pokemon for the purposes of this list. If a Pokemon typing’s moveset’s fast and charge moves do not share typing, that Pokemon’s type may be listed more than once due to fast move effectiveness changing depending on the type the charge move is attacking. For example, Steel set Heatran does not have a Steel fast move. When attacking Ice and Fairy, Fire Spin/Iron Head is ideal, but when attacking rock, Bug Bite/Iron head is ideal. Fire Spin/Iron Head is therefore labelled [Steel+] as it’s ideal for more types (2/3) while Bug Bite/Iron Head is labelled [St