Implement number-of-successes

[GoogleCodeExporter]

@Test
public void testEachVs()
{
  final AdditiveRoll method = new AdditiveRoll(mockDieRollerFactory(2,4,6));
  final MockOutput output = new MockOutput();
  method.writeResult("3d6 each vs 4", output);
  Assert.assertEquals("2, 4, 6 = 2 successes", output.getString());
}

Original issue reported on code.google.com by trent.ba...@gmail.com on 1 Nov 2009 at 7:46

[GoogleCodeExporter]

hmm, might be better to implement as a different format, e.g.

each: 3d6

or each: 3d6 vs 4

Original comment by trent.ba...@gmail.com on 1 Nov 2009 at 9:06

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What gaming systems uses rolls like these? I planned to implement similar rolls 
for 
success-based NWoD/Exalted rolls - like [5 = 10, 8, 7, 4, 1 = 4] with 
alternative 
specification of target number like [5/7].

Original comment by shooshpa...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2009 at 9:30

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by shooshpa...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2009 at 10:02

• Added labels: Type-Enhancement
• Removed labels: Type-Defect

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowrun#Mechanics Shadowrun] and some types of
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D6_system D6 system] games. I figured that the
suggested syntax would be generic enough to suit most uses. 

Original comment by trent.ba...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2009 at 11:46

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Most of the systems that use a target number have standard die size (6 for D6 
or 
Shadownrun, 10 for WoD/Exalted). This is why (imho) it is better to implement 
target 
numbers for corresponding systems, not for generic additive rolls. What do you 
think 
about it?

P.S.: Actually, I want to create a diceroller that people would use, so if you 
think 
that there are some cases where rolls like [5d6+3d8 tn 3] would be used, I'll 
surely 
implement that as well :)

Original comment by shooshpa...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2009 at 11:55

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I agree. Considering the most popular systems are D&D and WOD, targeting them 
should
be a priority.

Original comment by trent.ba...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2009 at 12:33

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Marking this issue as invalid, because implementation should go into specific 
methods.

Original comment by shooshpa...@gmail.com on 8 Nov 2009 at 12:21

• Changed state: Invalid