What's your "I have the worst luck" EQ moment(s)?

[Goregasmic]

Never did the shawl quest on live so figured I'd do this iconic quest at least once. I got to 165 tailoring which should give me roughly 60% success rate on the final combine of the 6th shawl. Last week being double loot I figured it would be perfect to refarm the parts if I failed an attempt or two. So 5 failures later I was utterly defeated and trying to find ways to cheer myself up and I mathed out that I had about 0,41% chance to also fail the 6th attempt.

Narrator: he also failed the 6th attempt.

It sent me wondering: with the game being so harsh at times, what's your "I have the worst luck" story? What never dropped, which mob never showed up, which roll did you lose way too often? I'm sure we all have too many stories like that.

[jolanar]

Going after a named mob when you want the common drop and then getting the rare drop 4 times in a row.

[shovelquest]

/random 100 on anything but gems and commons.

[PatChapp]

Fell asleep #1 at beads camp,woke up after 25mins later
Kicked out of list due to failing Check, beads had just dropped. Was my longest eq play session,like 18-20hrs

[sajbert]

Fell asleep #1 at beads camp,woke up after 25mins later
Kicked out of list due to failing Check, beads had just dropped. Was my longest eq play session,like 18-20hrs

I went longer on Jboots, like 25hrs and never got them that session. Had to bail and retry again.

[Jimjam]

I went longer on Jboots, like 25hrs and never got them that session. Had to bail and retry again.

What a way to save either 3k or a week of logging in for 5 mins 2x a day!

[zelld52]

Every time I'm oom or low mana on my enchanter my charm breaks at the same time root does

[Samoht]

I mathed out that I had about 0,41% chance to also fail the 6th attempt.

Narrator: he also failed the 6th attempt.

See, this is what you did wrong. This is the gambler's fallacy. Your previous attempts do not bear any influence over the current attempt. It's always the same flat success rate.

[Goregasmic]

Fell asleep #1 at beads camp,woke up after 25mins later
Kicked out of list due to failing Check, beads had just dropped. Was my longest eq play session,like 18-20hrs

Oh shit, that's a narcos pablo meme moment right there.

Every time I'm oom or low mana on my enchanter my charm breaks at the same time root does

Yeah, had that happen way too much. Just one last pair, even if you're low, in the name of efficiency and then you get an add, juggle them for 10 minutes and still die only to spend another 15 minutes running back and rebuff, because efficiency right? Now I'm much better with self control and much faster at ditching sketchy fights, it just isn't worth it even if you invested a lot in it. If it looks like a future "should have gated when I could" moment, I do.

But I think there's also a reverse-survivorship bias where we don't remember all the times it happened with full mana/hp and we were able to deal with it while we're scarred by the unlucky deaths.

[sajbert]

What a way to save either 3k or a week of logging in for 5 mins 2x a day!
I know right. To be fair though Jboots were pretty instrumental for leveling.

[Goregasmic]

See, this is what you did wrong. This is the gambler's fallacy. Your previous attempts do not bear any influence over the current attempt. It's always the same flat success rate.

I'm not great at statistics so correct me if I'm wrong but if you have a 40% fail rate there's a point where the odds of failing over X number of times in a row become pretty much statistically insignificant. It is not impossible but the probability is very low. The gamblers fallacy comes in when you believe the results of previous rolls impact the results of the next one, which is wrong but probabilities are still a thing.

So in essence, at 165 tailoring you have about 40% chance to fail. The probabilities would be that you'd have 1% chance to fail 5 combines so if you farm enough stuff for 5 combines it is pretty fair to expect one of them will work out even though it isn't impossible it doesn't.

I ended up getting my shawl on the 7th try so you could say I'm in the 1% club :cool:

[cd288]

I'm not great at statistics so correct me if I'm wrong but if you have a 40% fail rate there's a point where the odds of failing over X number of times in a row become pretty much statistically insignificant. It is not impossible but the probability is very low. The gamblers fallacy comes in when you believe the results of previous rolls impact the results of the next one, which is wrong but probabilities are still a thing.

So in essence, at 165 tailoring you have about 40% chance to fail. The probabilities would be that you'd have 1% chance to fail 5 combines so if you farm enough stuff for 5 combines it is pretty fair to expect one of them will work out even though it isn't impossible it doesn't.

I ended up getting my shawl on the 7th try so you could say I'm in the 1% club :cool:

You are correct. Probability calculations are a very different thing from the gambler's fallacy.

[onmove_broke]

Rolled a 0 out of 222 on a T-staff. Spent 8k on a Word for my lv 49 pet and failed

[Old_PVP]

Fails on trivial combines, sometimes a couple fails in a row. Makes me mad every time.

[Ennewi]

Years back, before green server or velious testing, fungi group formed around christmas break with the goal of obtaining 1 tunic per member. Within an hour or two, fungi after fungi kept dropping and my tank lost /random after /random. A rogue joined, won tunic and left right after, saying something came up. Another rogue joined, won tunic, but stayed for hours afterwards because the consecutive fungis suddenly stopped dropping and they felt bad. From then on there would be no more tunics. A few holdouts insisted they would stay but it was very late in the evening by then, with everyone having plans the next day/week. So we called it.

My other tank must have attended a good 50 or so scout rolls, sometimes with the bare minimum numbers present, yet never won the random.

[shovelquest]

Rolled a 0 out of 222 on a T-staff. Spent 8k on a Word for my lv 49 pet and failed

What was it like being hitler in your past life? :p

[shovelquest]

As opposed to the unlucky folk.

I'd like to hear from the folk that generally think, "Im a lucky guy" like.. everything goes your way and you win everything, and have no real concept of the idea of "bad luck" and wonder if everyone that complains about it is crazy.

Or even better, you're well aware of your luck and just laugh about it and bet on black every time and a hot babe trips and falls on you and both your clothes fall off etc.

[Opekyn]

Happened to me just this last week on the Chardok bridge:

Critical Paci resist --> FD Fail --> Your Gate Collapses
ripbozo

[Swish]

Being the first to roll on a fungi tunic with a 94...

...then literally the last roll is a 97 :o

[Samoht]

I'm not great at statistics so correct me if I'm wrong but if you have a 40% fail rate there's a point where the odds of failing over X number of times in a row become pretty much statistically insignificant. It is not impossible but the probability is very low. The gamblers fallacy comes in when you believe the results of previous rolls impact the results of the next one, which is wrong but probabilities are still a thing.

So in essence, at 165 tailoring you have about 40% chance to fail. The probabilities would be that you'd have 1% chance to fail 5 combines so if you farm enough stuff for 5 combines it is pretty fair to expect one of them will work out even though it isn't impossible it doesn't.

I ended up getting my shawl on the 7th try so you could say I'm in the 1% club :cool:

This sample size is no where near what's required to assume the probability is low.

[Fawqueue]

Back in 2010, I was camping Hadden on my Wizard. I was at that camp for 72 hours straight, when prolonged period of inactivity would get you booted back to login. I never got the earring before I passed out at the keyboard and lost the camp.

[druidbob]

Failed final combine on coldain shawl and Garzicor quest on the same toon within the same month, both trivial.

[Swish]

Failed final combine on coldain shawl and Garzicor quest on the same toon within the same month, both trivial.

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

[bcbrown]

I'd like to hear from the folk that generally think, "Im a lucky guy" like.. everything goes your way and you win everything, and have no real concept of the idea of "bad luck" and wonder if everyone that complains about it is crazy.

In the past fifteen hours I unexpectedly finished my druid's epic while fucking around in Chardok when someone gave me a free Kedge Keep MQ and brokered a cheap sale for the VSR MQ, went to bed, then woke up and won my first ever scout roll.

[Duik]

On a kedge phinny kill i was on enduring breath duty as a druid. That was my only job. We didnt know to use pets only etc.
I kept everyone alive who was dispelled!
Except me.
We failed. I blamed the ranger.

[WarpathEQ]

Having a winning 883 roll at angry goblin after spending over 100 hours there only to have someone roll a 886 on the 10th and final second that a roll was allowed.

[Haarfagre]

about 8000 PHs to get guardian's robe in Skyshrine. took about 6 months of active camping

[Goregasmic]

about 8000 PHs to get guardian's robe in Skyshrine. took about 6 months of active camping

That's known to be a very very long camp though. You think your experience is representative of that camp or you got it way worse?

[Ekco]

was in a family guild and in the rules it stated that 100dkp was the max bid on a item, it had never come up before until VS dropped wizzy staff, so i had to /roll random 100 for my epic piece even though i had more dkp than the other guy. lost the roll, left the guild and didn't finish my epic until like 4 years later.

[Swish]

Back in my Europa days I'll always remember something similar. There was an established guy who'd been in the guild a long time and an item dropped that he needed. I think it was an epic piece, it was tradeable whatever it was, and him and another guy needed it who'd been in the guild less than a month.

The officers told them to roll, established guy loses roll and starts complaining AFTER the roll. Then there was pressure for new guy to give it to established guy not just from the bitching guy that lost but from the officers as well. New guy was reluctant, I backed him up saying it was fair and square... and yeah the new guy said it wasn't worth it in the end and handed it over.

I think he left the guild a few weeks later. He definitely stopped raiding with us. Sad.

[moozh]

This sample size is no where near what's required to assume the probability is low.

Huh? The % chance of succeeding the combine for a single attempt is ~40%. Probabilities are multiplicative and you can find the % chance associated with failing X attempts based on this.

For one attempt, since the chance of success is 40%, the chance of failure is 60%.

OP decided to queue up five attempts. His chance of failing all five attempts (i.e., not having a single success) is 0.6^5, or 0.6*0.6*0.6*0.6*0.6, which is ~0.078%. Pretty close to 1%.

Take for example, another scenario in which his chance of success in one attempt is also 40%, but he queues up 1000 attempts. His chance of success is still 40% on each attempt, but in 1000 attempts there isn’t a 40% chance that he’ll succeed just once. After only a few attempts it becomes less and less probable that he’ll continue to fail every attempt.

[Samoht]

Probabilities are multiplicative

They are not.

This is the gambler's fallacy.

One failure does not increase your chance on success on the next attempt.

Don't spread lies.

[shovelquest]

So does this mean, if you flip a coin 50 times.

Sometimes youll get 49 heads 1 tails?

Sometimes youll get 49 tails 1 heads?

Sometimes youll get 50 heads? Sometimes youll get 50 tails?

Or if you flip a coin 50 times, youll on average get 25 of each?

If so, and for some reason you are looking at 40 heads after 40 flips, wouldn't the odds that it will be tails be higher? or is this just only explainable with a catchphrase "gamblers phalacy" unless you have a PHD in mathematics?

[Ekco]

ou’re onto an interesting thought process here, but let's break it down a bit.
1. Coin flips are independent events.

A coin flip is (assuming it's a fair coin) independent of all the flips that came before it. That means, on each flip, the probability of getting heads or tails is always 50/50, no matter what’s happened up to that point.

So if you’ve already flipped 40 heads in 40 flips (wildly unlikely, but not impossible), the odds of the next flip being tails are still 50%. This is where the gambler's fallacy comes in—thinking past outcomes influence future probabilities in independent events. They don’t.
2. Outcomes over 50 flips.

If you flip a coin 50 times, on average, you’ll get 25 heads and 25 tails, but that doesn’t mean it will always land exactly like that. Probability allows for a range of outcomes:

It’s very rare to get something extreme like 50 heads or 50 tails, but it’s not impossible.
The most likely outcome is something close to 25 heads and 25 tails, but the exact distribution will vary with each set of 50 flips.

The more flips you do, the closer the ratio of heads to tails is likely to get to 50:50 (this is the law of large numbers), but over small numbers of flips, you’ll see more variation.
3. What about 40 heads in 40 flips?

This is insanely improbable but not impossible. The probability of flipping 40 heads in a row is:
(0.5)40=1 in 1,099,511,627,776
(0.5)40=1 in 1,099,511,627,776

So if you're seeing that, you're either:

Very lucky (or unlucky).
Flipping a rigged coin. ��

But even then, the odds for the 41st flip are still 50/50 if the coin is fair.
TL;DR:

Coin flips are independent.
On average, you’ll get close to 25 heads and 25 tails in 50 flips, but it’s not guaranteed.
The gambler’s fallacy explains why we feel like tails would be "due" after seeing 40 heads, but mathematically, the odds remain the same: 50/50.

someone taught this thing TL;DR lol.

[Castle2.0]

Only got ~8 manastones instead of 9?

[Duik]

Ohh look, it's mr one trick pony himself.

Oh, and pointless caveat filled "fastest to 50" (using hunderds of hours of other peoples time) "first to kill <a_lame_mob1>" (in a sea of mediocracy maybe has 1/10 merit) and the evergreen "highest DPS within a narrow scope that nobody else bothers with".

See my sig for more info! Lolocaust.

[Ekco]

https://i.imgur.com/gO0LeQQ.png

[shovelquest]

https://i.imgur.com/gO0LeQQ.png

:D

[Samoht]

If so, and for some reason you are looking at 40 heads after 40 flips, wouldn't the odds that it will be tails be higher?

no, you would not have a higher percent chance of getting tails after 40 heads in a row. that's what the other people are implying by using the word "probability"

previous iterations have zero impact on the next event.

it's still 50/50 to be heads again.

[Jimjam]

I’d say after getting heads 40 times in a row you’re most likely to get heads next - it is more likely you have an imbalanced or double headed coin than you’ve got a one in a trillion streak of heads on a equally balanced coin.

[bcbrown]

I’d say after getting heads 40 times in a row you’re most likely to get heads next - it is more likely you have an imbalanced or double headed coin than you’ve got a one in a trillion streak of heads on a equally balanced coin.

This is the true Bayesian way - it's time to update your priors.

https://xkcd.com/1132/

[Goregasmic]

no, you would not have a higher percent chance of getting tails after 40 heads in a row. that's what the other people are implying by using the word "probability"

No one is saying this. They basically explained the low likelihood of getting a particular result in a string of the same event. Both concepts coexist. You're either trolling or you have no understanding of the concept of probabilities. The good thing is they still exist wether you believe in them or not.

Like, people calculated you have 72% chance to get a raster of guk spawn if you spend 10 hours there. You still have only 5% chance per spawn and it doesn't mean the spawn at the 10th hour is a 72% chance to be raster. Both statements are true regardless.

[shovelquest]

I’d say after getting heads 40 times in a row you’re most likely to get heads next - it is more likely you have an imbalanced or double headed coin than you’ve got a one in a trillion streak of heads on a equally balanced coin.

or...

tBJe53IA9DE

[moozh]

They are not.

This is the gambler's fallacy.

One failure does not increase your chance on success on the next attempt.

Don't spread lies.

From mathisfun.com (https://www.mathsisfun.com/data/probability-events-independent.html)

In our case, there are two possible outcomes: success (item drops), or failure (item does not drop). Think of success like being heads on a coin, and failure being tails (the difference being that our ‘coin’ is not 50/50).

If the chance in a single kill for the item to drop is 40% (success), the chance for the item to not drop is 60% (failure). The chance to get failure five times in a row (i.e., five independent failure events) is 0.6*0.6*0.6*0.6*0.6.

[cd288]

I don't mean this as an insult, but I've never understood the sacrificing your health for something like a manastone that has niche case use and is really only useful for a couple classes.

[Samoht]

No one is saying this. They basically explained the low likelihood of getting a particular result in a string of the same event. Both concepts coexist. You're either trolling or you have no understanding of the concept of probabilities. The good thing is they still exist wether you believe in them or not.

Like, people calculated you have 72% chance to get a raster of guk spawn if you spend 10 hours there. You still have only 5% chance per spawn and it doesn't mean the spawn at the 10th hour is a 72% chance to be raster. Both statements are true regardless.

One of these is probability, one of these is gambler's fallacy. The 72% unreliable. You cannot string failures together to assume success.

[Goregasmic]

One of these is probability, one of these is gambler's fallacy. The 72% unreliable. You cannot string failures together to assume success.

You're either arguing in bad faith or living above your intellectual means. Have a good day sir.

[WarpathEQ]

Learned last night that killing and respawning a quest turn in NPC does not actually reset their turn in log. Caused me to mess up a $50k MQ :(

[cd288]

You're either arguing in bad faith or living above your intellectual means. Have a good day sir.

Lol agreed. This dude is being so odd about probabilities.

[Samoht]

You're either arguing in bad faith or living above your intellectual means. Have a good day sir.

Just hate it when people intentionally conflate probability in this game to justify their bad luck. It sucks that the original complainer failed the shawl combine 6 times, but it sounds like they need to raise their tailoring skill.

Someone telling them on the forums that it's statistically improbable to fail that many times is just factually incorrect. It's an anomaly, for sure, but it's still within acceptable terms of probability.

I'm sorry that you cannot fathom that the chance for failure was still real after 6 tries, but the previous 5 tries do not have any influence on the sixth attempt.

I wish people would stop pushing the gambler's fallacy as probability. It's a huge mistake that lots of people make.

It's obvious that I can't fix stupid, though.

[Yinaltin]

Back in my Europa days I'll always remember something similar. There was an established guy who'd been in the guild a long time and an item dropped that he needed. I think it was an epic piece, it was tradeable whatever it was, and him and another guy needed it who'd been in the guild less than a month.

The officers told them to roll, established guy loses roll and starts complaining AFTER the roll. Then there was pressure for new guy to give it to established guy not just from the bitching guy that lost but from the officers as well. New guy was reluctant, I backed him up saying it was fair and square... and yeah the new guy said it wasn't worth it in the end and handed it over.

I think he left the guild a few weeks later. He definitely stopped raiding with us. Sad.

Uh i remember that day. i really felt for that guy.

had something similar needed to do my necro epic and wanted to save all my dkp for that CT drop. europa merged to remedy to lux to darkwind to rampage to tr to ib and everytime the dkp got reset and i never got the CT drop. Still havent completed my epic :)

[cd288]

Just hate it when people intentionally conflate probability in this game to justify their bad luck. It sucks that the original complainer failed the shawl combine 6 times, but it sounds like they need to raise their tailoring skill.

Someone telling them on the forums that it's statistically improbable to fail that many times is just factually incorrect. It's an anomaly, for sure, but it's still within acceptable terms of probability.

I'm sorry that you cannot fathom that the chance for failure was still real after 6 tries, but the previous 5 tries do not have any influence on the sixth attempt.

I wish people would stop pushing the gambler's fallacy as probability. It's a huge mistake that lots of people make.

It's obvious that I can't fix stupid, though.

I'm not disagreeing with you that it's not within a realm of probability to fail that many times. Just saying that's not what the gambler's fallacy is really.

[moozh]

Just hate it when people intentionally conflate probability in this game to justify their bad luck. It sucks that the original complainer failed the shawl combine 6 times, but it sounds like they need to raise their tailoring skill.

Someone telling them on the forums that it's statistically improbable to fail that many times is just factually incorrect. It's an anomaly, for sure, but it's still within acceptable terms of probability.

I'm sorry that you cannot fathom that the chance for failure was still real after 6 tries, but the previous 5 tries do not have any influence on the sixth attempt.

I wish people would stop pushing the gambler's fallacy as probability. It's a huge mistake that lots of people make.

It's obvious that I can't fix stupid, though.

Did you look at the link I posted? Or anything I wrote? It is unlikely to fail a 40% success rate combine six times in a row, and it’s easy to calculate -how- unlikely that is. It can still happen though.

[WarpathEQ]

Just hate it when people intentionally conflate probability in this game to justify their bad luck. It sucks that the original complainer failed the shawl combine 6 times, but it sounds like they need to raise their tailoring skill.

Someone telling them on the forums that it's statistically improbable to fail that many times is just factually incorrect. It's an anomaly, for sure, but it's still within acceptable terms of probability.

I'm sorry that you cannot fathom that the chance for failure was still real after 6 tries, but the previous 5 tries do not have any influence on the sixth attempt.

I wish people would stop pushing the gambler's fallacy as probability. It's a huge mistake that lots of people make.

It's obvious that I can't fix stupid, though.

This game is an interesting life lesson in the direct competition between statistical probabilities and the law of averages. Technically a prior event doesn't impact the RNG of the current event in a vacuum of probabilities.

However, if the event is performed enough times in succession the law of averages tells you that the past results do in fact influence future outcomes in that past annomolies in one direction will correct over time by compensating in the other direction and returning to the average.

Perhaps the gambler's falicy that the probability folks like to reference is in fact a more indepth phenomenon of how the world actually works from real experience and something that the science of probability doesn't properly weigh when viewed inside of their own vacuum.

There are many examples of how things work in a vacuum not being the true outcome in real life where other competing variables exist. My personal experience has been that upholding a stronger belief in the law of averages over statistical probabilities has yielded positive results versus others that live in the vacuum of probabilities alone when applied to EQ.

[Saisu]

However, if the event is performed enough times in succession the law of averages tells you that the past results do in fact influence future outcomes in that past annomolies in one direction will correct over time by compensating in the other direction and returning to the average.

For a 50/50 coin flip, you're looking at ~100 flips to have a good sample size. So for this person's 40/60 "coin flip" over 6 "flips" it's telling a very unreliable story.

Because this is a typically "one and done" tailoring combine, you're not going to see that leveling out over a large sample size (example: having 6 combine successes in a row). So people's perceptions are skewed.

Basically the lower your attempt / sample size, the less power the "law of averages" will affect you. It's much much more likely to have skewed results with 4 coin flips than with 1,000 coin flips.

[bcbrown]

However, if the event is performed enough times in succession the law of averages tells you that the past results do in fact influence future outcomes in that past annomolies in one direction will correct over time by compensating in the other direction and returning to the average.

This is way of phrasing it is absolutely incorrect. That is not how it works. I don't mean to pick on you as everyone in this thread talking about probability is either misinformed, poory educated, or very sloppy in both their phrasing and reading comprehension. What you wrote is a clear example of the gambler's fallacy and it is wrong.

To set a clear foundation, I think we're all talking about calculating the probability of independent events. The success or failure of a tradeskill combine is unrelated to the outcome of past tradeskills combine. Each tradeskill combine of a given item is an independent event with an identical probability of success. Everyone agrees with this, right?

The nuance with calculating probabilities of the outcome of a series of independent events comes with the point in time when you're making the calculation. The probability of flipping a coin 1 time is 50%. The probability of flipping a coin 10 times and having them all come up heads is 0.5^10, or about one in a thousand. I think everyone would agree with this too.

if you've already flipped a coin 9 times and they're all heads, the probability of the next coin flip being heads is still 50%. At this point in time the probability of getting 10 heads in a row is 50%, because nine of the flips are in the past and they're already heads. The gambler's fallacy is to think that because there's less than a 1% chance of getting 10 head flips in a row, the next flip is almost certainly going to be tails. This is not true. It's 50%. (This is disregarding the possibility that the coin is weighted or double-headed, we're assuming it's an actually fair coin).

What you're talking about with laws of averages and reversions to the mean is different from how you're applying it. You said "past anomalies in one direction will correct over time by compensating in the other direction". This is not correct. An accurate way to say it would be "past anomalies in one direction will be have their impact diluted by adding enough additional coin flips."

Image you're going to flip a coin 100 times. You expect you'll get about 50 heads, plus or minus a couple. The first 10 flips are heads. An incorrect understanding of probability is think "of the next 90 flips, its likely there will be more tails than head". That is precisely the gambler's fallacy. A correct understanding would be "the next 90 flips are likely going to be 50% outcomes with about 45 heads, so I expect the total number of heads will be about 55, more or less". The next 90 outcomes will swamp the effect of the first 10 heads. But it's not "compensating in the other direction".

Anyway, I hope you don't take this as a personal attack. You've been very helpful to me on these forums in the past, and what you wrote is broadly right in general, just wrong on the exact mechanism by how it happens.

[Duik]

Well thank you bcbrown.
I dunno if others were trying to say that and failed or they were wrong.

The bit that helped me the most was after the run of heads that probability is done. The next roll/cast is unaffected but that. The next is 50/50.

If the coins aren't flipped yet, that's when the "the chances of getting 10 heads in a row by multiplying" comes into play.

Wow that is really difficult to articulate. But I get it (what bc was saying). I hope it helped others.

[cd288]

Well thank you bcbrown.
I dunno if others were trying to say that and failed or they were wrong.

The bit that helped me the most was after the run of heads that probability is done. The next roll/cast is unaffected but that. The next is 50/50.

If the coins aren't flipped yet, that's when the "the chances of getting 10 heads in a row by multiplying" comes into play.

Wow that is really difficult to articulate. But I get it (what bc was saying). I hope it helped others.

This is a good way to put it and bcbrown's example is a really good one.

Before the coins are flipped ten times it's safe to say the probability of 9 or 10 heads is very low, which you can do the math on to calculate. That doesn't mean it won't happen, and if you're in a run of 9 heads in a row the pre-flipping probability calculation has no impact on what the 10th flip will be.

Another way to look at it. If I bet you money that if I flip a coin 10 times it will be heads every time, you'd take that bet. If I've flipped a coin 9 times and it's heads and I bet you that it's going to be heads on the 10th flip, you might not take the bet because that one flip is still 50%.

[Kich867]

I failed the final trivial combine of the Shawl quest. IIRC it's not like, the worst thing in the world, but I did have to go back and farm a handful of items to remake the pieces to do the combine again.

That being said, I think I two shot the 208 skill one at like 168 skill? Maybe it took three tries, it wasn't that bad.

[Uglysses]

wanted to do Sparring armor for my monk
80 tailoring
1 hour to farm 6 of those escaped frogloks
failed the trivial combine

[Trelaboon]

I’ve attended like 200 scout rolls and still haven’t won a single one.

[ZarkinFrood]

lost scout rolls for months, when I finally did win the roll there weren't enough people to successfully take down the mob so we wiped. On that same toon, I had to /random 500 on an epic item against a guildie, I rolled decently high but the person I was up against beat me with my birthday number lol

[cd288]

lost scout rolls for months, when I finally did win the roll there weren't enough people to successfully take down the mob so we wiped. On that same toon, I had to /random 500 on an epic item against a guildie, I rolled decently high but the person I was up against beat me with my birthday number lol

That actually prompts a good question. If it's clear there aren't enough people there do we expect everyone to try anyway and wipe and eat a death?

[Vaarsuvius]

You want bad luck ? It took me about 4500 wyvern, wurm, and cube kills in SS to get my enchanter a Wurm Lord Shawl ��
I got 2-3 Wurm Scale Capes in the meantime (PoS shawl with the same graphics)

[PatChapp]

You want bad luck ? It took me about 4500 wyvern, wurm, and cube kills in SS to get my enchanter a Wurm Lord Shawl ��
I got 2-3 Wurm Scale Capes in the meantime (PoS shawl with the same graphics)

I'm at around 6k,no shawl. I've had 3 of those heartbreak capes in one day

I just do it when I need to.refill the xp bar now,tell myself il never see one to keep the hope down.
Also a necro friend of mine got 2 shawls in a weekend
His first weekend killing dar's

[Trexller]

That actually prompts a good question. If it's clear there aren't enough people there do we expect everyone to try anyway and wipe and eat a death?

the roll is postponed until a kill force shows up, this happens alot post-quake, once we got a tank, cleric, puller and some dps then the roll happens

I dunno why they would have rolled without a kill force

must have been on green

[Goregasmic]

I'm at around 6k,no shawl. I've had 3 of those heartbreak capes in one day

I just do it when I need to.refill the xp bar now,tell myself il never see one to keep the hope down.
Also a necro friend of mine got 2 shawls in a weekend
His first weekend killing dar's

Damn. Considered it initially but seeing other people I know couldn't get it to drop I went the coldain shawl path but didn't know it was guardian robe territory. Makes the 7th shawl looks like child's play.

[Vaarsuvius]

Damn. Considered it initially but seeing other people I know couldn't get it to drop I went the coldain shawl path but didn't know it was guardian robe territory. Makes the 7th shawl looks like child's play.

Do no let that discourage you from farming one. I just had very bad luck for that particular shawl. The other 4 I farmed only took 200-250 kills each to drop, which can be quite fast with a necro or enchanter

Some people are very lucky and get a shawl after a couple kills …

[shovelquest]

lost scout rolls for months, when I finally did win the roll there weren't enough people to successfully take down the mob so we wiped. On that same toon, I had to /random 500 on an epic item against a guildie, I rolled decently high but the person I was up against beat me with my birthday number lol

Sounds like it'd be much easier to get WAY BETTER wrists by joining a raiding guild, no?

Loramin, does your beuracracy not need to exist, because this type of drop rate for crappy group loot BoB's is not worth it?

Bob's are group loot by the way.....

[Goregasmic]

Do no let that discourage you from farming one. I just had very bad luck for that particular shawl. The other 4 I farmed only took 200-250 kills each to drop, which can be quite fast with a necro or enchanter

Some people are very lucky and get a shawl after a couple kills …

Maybe some day but all I need is swordfish tooth to finish shawl 7th and I'm unguilded right now so basically my only chance to get FT1 for the foreseeable future.

That and being a chanter neriad shawl is kinda nice too for apparently much less hassle but wouldn't be surprised if I camped wurm lord anyway later.

[PatChapp]

Maybe some day but all I need is swordfish tooth to finish shawl 7th and I'm unguilded right now so basically my only chance to get FT1 for the foreseeable future.

That and being a chanter neriad shawl is kinda nice too for apparently much less hassle but wouldn't be surprised if I camped wurm lord anyway later.

It's something to do and is kind of fun playing with supercub
Neriad is nice,but if you play an enchanter and gear it,you'll outgrow it.

[Wilshire]

Didn't happen in P99, but happened in Live.

Hunting in Sebilis. A mob resisted five snares in a row. We ended up getting trained when the mob ran.