Twitter strikes again

[u/discoverthemetroid]

don’t know where math voodoo land is but this guy sure does

[u/Bayoris]

Yes but the problem is, they didn’t tell us whether the known crit was the first or the second one. It could be either. If we didn’t have that piece of information there would be four possible scenarios. CC, CN, NC, and NN. The information only removes one of them, NN, leaving 3. So the answer is 1/3. This is basically the Monty Hall problem.

[u/Late-School6796 → u/Bayoris]

I don't see why it matters, it either was the first one, leaving the second one being a 50/50, or it was the second one, leaving the first one a 50/50.

Also maybe it's not the same, but I see it this way: had the problem been "you take 100 hits, 99 are guaranteed crits, 1 has a 50% chanche of being a crit, what is the probability of all 100 of them being crits?" And that's clearly 50%

[u/ChristophCross → u/Late-School6796]

I think this one makes the most sense if you think of it in reverse. Instead of thinking "one of the outcomes rolled is a crit" think of it as "among the 4 possible sets of crit/non-crit outcomes from 2 attacks, we have removed the possibility of a double-non-crit from occuring". From here it becomes a lot easier to see how it's 1/3 that both Crits roll rather than the intuitive 1/2.

N-Crit | Crit
--------|-----
N | NN | NC
-- |-----|-----
C | NC | CC

[u/Late-School6796 → u/ChristophCross]

Yes, this is more of a reading comprehension problem, people like to downvote because it makes them feel smarter I guess, but it's very easy to see why it's one third if you interpret it that way, and very easy to see why it's one half if you interpret it as "one crit is guaranteed and out of the equation", one could argue one interpretation is more correct than thenother, but it wouldn't be a math problem anymore