There is some truth in it, but what he fails to show is actual tests. You have to roll a d20 about
|not sure about the exact number, but this is what I remember |
times to find a defect which causes an error in the number of times you roll a specific number larger than 20%, e.g if you roll 16 4% of the time instead of 5% of the time, you can only be sure after after rolling and recording the result 3000 times.
I did that once for a die which has a very large gap between two numbers. I can't find the result anymore, but there was indeed an error like that. Another die, also a cheap one, did not show a statistically significant deviation after 3000 throws.
Unless you had a very combat-intensive game, you rolled maybe 1000 times. If you got only 40 20's instead of the expected 50, that is still likely to be random chance rather than a defective die.
And then the defect has to be on the number of 1's or 20's. A defect on the 5 is not going to affect play, even if it is 2%.
Now, apart from edges and face-to-face distances, there can be other factors which influence outcome, like density variations, or the molding scar he's talking about. Without testing, it is hard to say what the actual influence of the different factors are.
In short: I sincerely doubt cheap dice affect role playing games. Then again, those dice look nice with the sharp edges and aren't really that expensive anyway.
recording dice rolls
|to speed up recording the dice rolls, I wrote a simple program which allows you to roll the die with one hand and record it with a click of the mouse with the other hand. That way I could roll 3000 times in less than an hour. If you are interested, I can send you the program. |