Pure RNG is the worst thing ever.

[FranSeara]

The rates and outcomes where stated from the get go. "Not eveyone will complete the Relic Quest." I think this statement is FAIR. The results known, everyone is on the same playing feild with the SAME rates and percentages (no one could cheat RNG). The only thing you can do is "NOT PLAY" the game, If you dont like RNG. I've been the victem of RNG, I'm 0 out 30 on Shiva Ex for the SMN Book and I'm 0 out 6 for the BLM coat in WOD (this with rolling need). I may not like this but it FAIR.

If you've ever played any of SMT games, you'd know you what pure RNG hell was. You never had more then a 50% chance of being Instantly killed by a light or dark spell. All this without being able to save for hours of gameplay.

[Izsha]

I take stats class if you take programming class, deal?

We can discuss with formulas if you like, but then most of the others will quit discussion...

There is no discussion. Rolling a dice by yourself is no different than taking turns rolling dice with a group. I am just as likely to roll 1 twice in a row regardless if I roll back to back, or once and then let 5 others roll then I roll again. As for the programming version where there's a pattern (usually pretty darn long anyway) there is no way to make sure X people went between your rolls to somehow trap you in the permanent cycle of the same number. The odds of you landing in the same spot repeatedly is astronomically low. Ultimately your place in the pattern (if they use that type of programming which we can't even verify. Speculation is bad mmkay) would be random. 2 leveled of rng still apply to the same.rule of averages as 1 level of rng.

Hiding behind 'there is no TRUE rng with programming' doesn't change the fact that from a players perspective it is functionally random as we can't control the variables to determine the outcome and will ultimately fall under a bell curve of results with more attempts. The no 'true' rng algorithm junk is semantics. The results for players mirror randomness, even If technically they are not. Functionally random.

Tldr: no matter how they are doing the rng on the back end, it is "functionally" rng to the user because we cannot control the variables as there are to many moving parts for 1 player to have an impact. More attempts will always move you closer to the intended avg.

[Risvertasashi]

As iterated... it's fair from a top down, distribution perspective, yes. From an individual's perspective... no, no it is not.

And, no. Not playing is NOT the only option. We can give feedback. We can suggest alternatives. We can ask for outliers to be normalized. Which many in this thread and previous ones have been doing.

[ziddyt]

Imagine if this was a thing in real life.
"Oh sorry buddy, you didn't get your raise this year, rng determined the guy who did 1/4 of the work you did actually deserved it. Good luck, try again. Or don't, just quit life if you don't like it."
Super fair.

[HumsterMKX]

And, no. Not playing is NOT the only option. We can give feedback. We can suggest alternatives. We can ask for outliers to be normalized. Which many in this thread and previous ones have been doing.

Incoming White knights and self proclaim hardworkers.

You need to run before the impale you due to their principles.

[SendohJin]

But I get confused when people talk about it in relation to party loot. Is the game supposed to keep track of how many times you've run each instance and how long it's been since you last saw a drop for you class in that instance and how many times you've rolled on it and lost? And then also weighing that against your party members in 4 person 8 person and 24 person instances.

That's a LOT of information for the game to keep track of and SE has already said on multiple occasions that they are taxing their servers heavily already with the amount of personal data they send back and forth.

i've got two words for you "Rowena's Token".

Its FAIR because how else do you TEACH or TELL a computer to hand out items in a fair and even maner.

and i've got another two words for you "Diamond Dust".

it's not like they don't know how to do it right, they just decide not to.

[Heskett]

What would you prefer: 10% chance of an item dropping at the end of a dungeon or completing that dungeon 100 times to get the item? I personally would prefer the 10% chance because that's possibly up to 99 dungeon runs I wouldn't have to do. You could argue "But what if it takes you more than 100 runs and still not get that item?" and I'll tell you "The odds of that are extremely low and only the lowest percentile of people would even come close to having such bad luck".

[Pandastirfry]

Imagine if this was a thing in real life.
"Oh sorry buddy, you didn't get your raise this year, rng determined the guy who did 1/4 of the work you did actually deserved it. Good luck, try again. Or don't, just quit life if you don't like it."
Super fair.

Well that's just silly, and not even remotely analogus. how about...
"You but a $1 lottery ticket every week for ten years, another person buys one for the first time only this week, you have both completed the same task this week. Draw comes up and their number hits and yet again, yours doesn't"
That seems more analogus to running content and hoping for a drop, wouldn't you say.
Did they not deserve it because you've been buying tickets for longer? I mean you've been doing more "work" in this case as well.

[FranSeara]

Imagine if this was a thing in real life.
"Oh sorry buddy, you didn't get your raise this year, rng determined the guy who did 1/4 of the work you did actually deserved it. Good luck, try again. Or don't, just quit life if you don't like it."
Super fair.

Life is RNG. From the day you are born RNG is with you. Be born ugly, fat, stupid or Ill . All out of your control (nature's form of RNG is DNA). If you never wanted to be the victim of RNG you'd never be able to leave the house. Randomness is Everwhere. This idea of work should = award is very nice indeed. But, Who determines how much work is needed to get the reward? " I feel ALL my work should earn me awards" Kinda one sided statement there....

[Risvertasashi]

What would you prefer: 10% chance of an item dropping at the end of a dungeon or completing that dungeon 100 times to get the item? I personally would prefer the 10% chance because that's possibly up to 99 dungeon runs I wouldn't have to do. You could argue "But what if it takes you more than 100 runs and still not get that item?" and I'll tell you "The odds of that are extremely low and only the lowest percentile of people would even come close to having such bad luck".

So here's what you do. You have that 10% drop rate (though in XIV in some cases it's more like 2%). You also have a token drop. After collecting a certain number of tokens (in your example 100, but that's a bit much IMO), you can trade it for the item if RNG hates you.

See, XIV has over 4 million accounts, probably around 500k active subscribers. Even if there's only a 0.1% chance of having that really terrible luck, that's still hundreds of people you're writing off.

Well that's just silly, and not even remotely analogus. how about...
"You but a $1 lottery ticket every week for ten years, another person buys one for the first time only this week, you have both completed the same task this week. Draw comes up and their number hits and yet again, yours doesn't"
That seems more analogus to running content and hoping for a drop, wouldn't you say.
Did they not deserve it because you've been buying tickets for longer? I mean you've been doing more "work" in this case as well.

And that is why lottery is often referred to as a "math tax". Lotteries and casinos are designed to take advantage of cognitive biases in people. Our online, fantasy virtual worlds do not have to be this way.