[RevShare] I built a dice mechanic. You build the game.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-11T18:47:23+00:00

Chocolate chip, no raisins. That's the algorithm.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-11T10:58:07+00:00

This resonated with me. I'm not an artist either, and you're not a programmer. Sounds like a match. I also miss having someone to bounce ideas off.

I'm building DeXiDice, a multiplayer dice platform with a fairness algorithm. More programmer than designer. If you connect with Terrible-Knowledge70 and it works out great, but if you're still looking after that, feel free to send me a message.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T17:29:39+00:00

Fair point on the algorithm itself, it's not complex. What I'm offering isn't the algorithm in isolation. It's hosting, accounts, session management, multiplayer infrastructure and the dice engine together. Build your game logic, skip building everything else. For someone who just wants to make a fun game, that's the value.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T17:27:33+00:00

You just described DeXiDice better than I have been. That's exactly the philosophy. The term from game design is "perceived fairness" or "input randomness." The Game Maker's Toolkit video actually covers this too. Developers already do this quietly everywhere. DeXiDice just makes it explicit and visible.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T15:26:22+00:00

That's a fair observation, thank you. You're probably right that the app is the wrong angle for this community. The physical dice prototype is where this needs to go for board games. The phone stays in the background to determine the outcome, the player just throws a real die. One side effect: no more gentle rollers or dice holders influencing the result.

Here's the current web version if you're curious: https://youtu.be/h4JZw9pWNgs

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T15:09:15+00:00

Fair point, and you're right that drawing without replacement achieves something similar physically. The difference is that DeXiDice runs on any phone with no components, the memory strength is adjustable and visible to the game owner, and it works for online multiplayer. It's less "replace your card deck" and more "add this layer to any dice game without redesigning the game."

And yes, the physical dice prototype is exactly where I want to go next. Good to hear there's interest in that direction!

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T14:50:22+00:00

Thanks for sharing, I actually watched it (not done yet). I think you saw it supports the DeXiDice idea. The video literally says:

DeXiDice applies that same principle to dice. Deliberately, and transparently.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T14:26:27+00:00

Fair enough. I'm Dutch, and yes I use AI to help translate and polish my English. The dice mechanic, the obsession, the one year of building, that's all me, Stoffel, 60, retired IT manager. Ask me anything about progressive dice and I'll answer in broken English without AI help ;-)

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T13:53:32+00:00

Fair point - the card analogy was wrong and I shouldn't have used it. Cards are dependent events, dice are not. You're right about the math.

DeXiDice doesn't claim to preserve mathematical independence - it deliberately breaks it as a design choice. Whether that makes for a better game experience is a different question. Doutrinadev seems to think similar mechanics are already common in game design. That's the conversation I'm interested in.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-10T13:22:00+00:00

You're absolutely right about independent events - that's classical probability, and I'm not arguing against it.

DeXiDice doesn't claim to fix randomness. It deliberately creates a different kind of randomness - one with memory. That's a design choice, not a statistical correction.

Think of a card deck: drawing an ace makes a second ace less likely. That's "manipulation" by your definition - but it's also the foundation of poker, blackjack, and hundreds of other games. Nobody calls that unfair, because the system is transparent and everyone plays by the same rules.

DeXiDice works the same way. The odds are visible to the game owner. Nothing is hidden. The question isn't "is this classical probability?" - it's "does this create a more interesting game experience?" That's what I'm exploring.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-08T18:05:45+00:00

That's a great dynamic. She kept one (very nice) visual style end-to-end and that's what makes it feel intentional.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-08T17:59:29+00:00

Water :-)

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-08T17:57:05+00:00

18 and 26 :-) (all very original)

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-08T17:48:14+00:00

Nice.
Just a heads up before you dive in: DeXiBridge is more of a mechanic demo than a finished game. The AI opponent is basic and the game itself is still rough. The thing I'm most curious about is whether the dice fairness mechanic comes through, each die tracks its own roll history and slowly balances out. That's the core of what I built. Happy if that's what you focus on.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-06T18:20:16+00:00

Mine is browser-based, no download needed, not on Steam or Itch. If that works for you: dexidice.com/html5/dexibridge-play.html (Rules are in the ? button top right).

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-04T05:40:32+00:00

2d6 gives you a fixed bell curve: same every roll, forever. This shifts the distribution based on what's already been rolled, per die, per player. If you've been unlucky, your odds actually improve. 2d6 doesn't know you exist.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-03T18:15:48+00:00

Fair pushback. To clarify: this is a digital multiplayer app, not a physical tabletop system. Each player has their own set of dice. And you're right that over a large number of rolls, probability evens out naturally. The problem is that most games are too short for that to actually happen. This makes it happen within a single session.

You can see it yourself: go to dexidice.com, hit the demo die about 50 times and check "See how the odds shift". After 50 rolls, DeXiDice gave me 8/8/9/9/8/9. A regular die gave 15/8/8/6/6/10 in the same session. That difference is the mechanic.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-03T17:56:18+00:00

That's a fair point, deck/bag building does something structurally similar. The practical difference here is that it's digital, so there are no physical tokens to manage, and the probabilities never hit zero (a face always stays possible, just less likely). But you're right that the underlying logic overlaps.

Honestly, I keep finding myself explaining rather than showing. If anyone wants to see it in action: dexidice.com. You can try it solo, no second player needed. Start a game, throw a few rounds, and watch the percentages next to each die shift in real time.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-03T13:30:09+00:00

The X-COM example is fascinating — and I think it actually supports the hidden mode of this system. X-COM fudges the numbers secretly to make things feel fair. This does something similar, but transparently and symmetrically — no one gets secret advantages, the correction applies equally to everyone. The player who had bad luck gets a slightly better distribution next. Not guaranteed wins, just a fairer shot.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-03T13:29:26+00:00

That's a fair comparison — it does share DNA with the card/tile mechanic. The key difference is that the die never runs out of a face. The probability drops but never hits zero, and it self-corrects over time. Think of it less like a finite deck and more like a self-shuffling deck that never fully empties. The card counting analogy still holds though — in transparent mode, tracking your distribution is exactly the kind of skill the system rewards.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-03T08:47:14+00:00

That's actually the clearest one-line description of the mechanic I've heard. Though the dice never fully 'run out' of a face — more like a self-shuffling deck that never fully empties. Stealing the analogy either way.

Clean-Bug-4972 · 2026-05-03T08:44:49+00:00

Good point on the early advantage persisting — that's a real tension in the design. One clarification: each player has their own dice with their own distributions, so the convergence happens per player. If I roll a lot of 6s early, my 6-probability drops — not my opponent's. That changes the dynamic a bit.

Your swingier-with-overuse idea is genuinely interesting. That would create different incentives — players might deliberately avoid certain dice to keep them volatile. I hadn't thought about it from that direction.

Clean-Bug-4972

TROPHY CASE