|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:21 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:22 pm
In my experience there's no such thing as luck...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:22 pm
Eh.
I say we claim sabaac as the official test of "luck" in the GFFA. The Force has midichlorians, luck has sabaac.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:24 pm
That's also skill, but luck does factor in a great deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:25 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:26 pm
the amount of skill needed for sabaac is insignificant when compared to the power of luck required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:24 pm
Think there's any chance that someone could write rules for sabacc and create the cards so that it could actually be played?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:32 pm
been done. go to wookieepedia and look it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:53 pm
Oh wow! I could be at this for hours!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:52 pm
Too bad there's no way to recreate the randomizer. That's what separates it from poker and blackjack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:54 pm
agreed. Though I bet online Sabacc would be possible if someone would spend the time to make it. that would be sweet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:55 pm
That's true. idea LucasArts should put it in the next Galaxies update.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sol Walker rolled 2 12-sided dice:
8, 6
Total: 14 (2-24)
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:06 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sol Walker generated a random number between
1 and 25 ...
19!
|
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:07 pm
hmm...I think I figured out how to play sabacc over gaia...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Durza the Shade generated a random number between
1 and 25 ...
13!
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:30 pm
They might, if the idea occurs to them. It wouldn't be too terribly hard, I should think. The ESRB would have to add a "gambling" descriptor, but that wouldn't affect the rating.
Don't forget you need negative numbers too. Positive 23 beats negative 23, and the Idiot's Array beats all. No way of getting that with random numbers, though.
*attempts to use negatives*
*doesn't work*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
