2008-10-30, 10:38 AM
[SIZE="1"]
They way it needs to be approached is somewhere in between both arguments in my opinion. Yes each scroll only has a 30% chance to work. If you used 1000 scrolls, about 300 would work and the other 700 would fail.
But if you recorded each time you used a scroll you will obviously find that it is a random assortment of passing and failing, it's extremely rare to find many many passes in a row, and it's also rare to see a whole bunch fails in a row, they are randomly distributed. Since whether the scroll passes or not is indeed randomly assorted, you can assume that the more fails you get in a row, the sooner you will get one to pass.
But either way it's not worth wasting money baiting.
Orit Wrote:So what have you gained by wasting hundreds of 30% scrolls until you get 20 fails in a row?[/SIZE]
You know the next one only has a 30% chance of succeeding, same as if it were your first 30% scroll ever.
It only gives you the right to whine "Can you believe it? I had 21 30% scrolls fail on me in a row!" to your buddies. Which is what is most likely (70%) to happen.
They way it needs to be approached is somewhere in between both arguments in my opinion. Yes each scroll only has a 30% chance to work. If you used 1000 scrolls, about 300 would work and the other 700 would fail.
But if you recorded each time you used a scroll you will obviously find that it is a random assortment of passing and failing, it's extremely rare to find many many passes in a row, and it's also rare to see a whole bunch fails in a row, they are randomly distributed. Since whether the scroll passes or not is indeed randomly assorted, you can assume that the more fails you get in a row, the sooner you will get one to pass.
But either way it's not worth wasting money baiting.