Players are complaining about low rolls (they think it's a FG problem)

[LordEntrails]

At one point Doug setup a campaign stats page for a handful of campaigns. It showed things like who did the most damage, crits, etc. I think it also included average roll info too. Not sure what to search, but you might be able to find some of the posts that have links to these pages.

All the ones I looked at showed what appeared to be everything withing expected deviations.

[ddavison]

Yep, we have a chat parser we can upload to that will show the frequency of all rolls and it also tallies who hits and misses the most and lots of other stuff. Distribution on the # of campaigns we processed seems to all fall within normal bounds.

I'm guessing that if you asked them if the DM's rolls are also low they would say "no".

[Bonkon]

I think this explanation about physics engine should suffice. In fact, I believe it to be more of a psychological impression than any concrete reason to think there is a error on FG. In face-to-face tables with real data, for example, they think there is a problem with the dice, they exchange for anothe dice, and so on. I Just needed a clear answer about the dice roller engine to have something objective as an objection to to unnecessary complaints at the table. Thanks.

Good Day GainunX
When we used to play face to face everyone always had numerous dice that they could change out to if the rolls were bad, here our players change the die color for the same psychological effect

[Erin Righ]

It's called a confirmation bias, and it is something that scientists are constantly on the look out for. I basically goes; before my accident there were not as many amputees in my home city. The statement is patently absurd on its face, but now that I am an amputee I see amputees everywhere, what gives? Confirmation Bias. When looking for something you are more likely to see what you are expecting. Ask people what percentage of GDP the US spends on foreign aid, and many Americans asked will respond with the numbers of 10-25%, then you tell then that the US spends like 3-4% on Military and they will change there estimation to high single digits (7-9%). These people expect the government to spend highly on foreign aid, and will even (at times) say they can cite non-existent sources putting foreign aid so high. This is the same thing, they expect it, so they believe they saw it. If you are at all interested, I believe the US spends about 0.1-0.2% on foreign aid, but you can look that up. What I do know is that the military budget is over 10 times the foreign aid budget. Dulux-oz is correct, you can have them log rolls, but you would need thousands of rolls to show averages or you can use Celestian's advice and don't let them forget the good stuff, make critical success just as memorable as critical failure. They'll get over it.

[Erin Righ]

I should say that the statistics for GDP and foreign aid are similar in most developed countries, I am in no way dumping on Americans here.

[Nylanfs]

Tell them yo change the different colour of dice, yea placebo effect!

[Nylanfs]

Or you buy a white car, suddenly there are white cars everywhere.

[Erin Righ]

Or you buy a white car, suddenly there are white cars everywhere.

Exactly, I never saw another Subaru Forester until I bought one for my wife, now you'd think every middle aged housewife in BC drove one from the amount I see them, and what's up with them all being driven by middle aged housewives, anyway?

[LordEntrails]

Exactly, I never saw another Subaru Forester until I bought one for my wife, now you'd think every middle aged housewife in BC drove one from the amount I see them, and what's up with them all being driven by middle aged housewives, anyway?

Thanks, I needed an amusing chuckle

[Ken L]

Players will always find something to blame when the rolls don't go their way. They'll get wiser the more they play, or you'll get more tired of their BS, one or the other.