Specifically, this D&D character:
You can submit your guess for any facts about my D&D character as options to the market. After letting people trade on them for a while, I will resolve true statements about the character to YES and false statements to NO. If a statement is something that is true to some degree, such that it doesn't feel right to resolve it fully to YES or NO, I may resolve to a probability. If there is no fact of the matter (i.e., the statement is something that has not been established either way about the character), then I will resolve it to N/A. For example, if someone submitted, "He ate chicken on his 10th birthday", that would resolve N/A because what he ate on his 10th birthday has never been established.
I will also resolve N/A if someone submits something that I have already revealed or that's completely obvious from the picture (e.g., "He's a tabaxi", or "He has black fur.")
The title has [???] because I haven't revealed what his name is.
Inspired by /evergreenemily/experimental-nonpredictive-evergree
I won't bet.
1,000
3.00Just off the top of my head, he's been to the Material Plane, the Nine Hells, Dal Quor, the Astral Plane, the Shadowfell, a plane that was accessed by traveling through mirrors (I can't remember what plane it was or if it actually had a name), the inside of a portable hole, a weird dream-like thing of unknown ontological status, the inside of a book containing people's memories (also of unknown ontological status), the Elemental Plane of Fire (briefly), probably the Ethereal Plane (not 100% sure), and an unknown number of demiplanes.
A bit of a vague question, so let's see.
On the one hand, INT is one of his dump stats. On the other hand, all that really means is that he's slightly below average with a -1 INT bonus, and "smart" presumably also includes WIS, skill proficiencies, and to a lesser extent CHA, which are all above the "average person" with the latter two being very good. And then there's the issue of how I actually play him, where the low INT stat really doesn't play into his personality at all, but cunningness due to the high CHA does.
It feels wrong to resolve it YES when he has an INT of 8, but it also feels wrong to resolve it NO when everything else points to him being fairly smart, so I'm going to resolve it to 50%. And now you have some clues for the other options.
I love the probabilities that when combined imply that traders are extremely confident that he's one of two extremes, but they don't know which one. E.g., there's a 51% chance he's honest to a fault and a 48% chance that he's a pathological liar, so only a 1% chance that he is sometimes, but not always, honest.
I think I can't unresolve this one until I resolve all the others. But I'm also afraid to do that because when I tested unresolving an unlinked market, it got an error. I think I will probably wait until I'm confident unresolving will work, and then resolve and unresolve all options to fix this one.
Confirming something from the market description: if there's a question that you didn't have an answer to, but seeing the question makes you want to answer it, do you intend to resolve it N/A despite subsequently answering it after you saw the market?
To use an existing item as an example: if you saw the question about having a specific personality type for him, and your reaction was "I didn't, but that sounds like a good idea, and now I do", would you resolve N/A rather than Yes?
@josh Depends on exactly what the question is. If the option is something like, "His great great grandmother was a famous writer," then obviously there is no established lore about that and no way to determine whether it's true or not from established facts about the character, so it would resolve N/A even if I later decide to make it canon because of the option.
On the other hand, questions about his personality type might be possible to resolve based on how he acts, even if I have never explicitly stated, "His personality type is X".
On the other hand, questions about his personality type might be possible to resolve based on how he acts, even if I have never explicitly stated, "His personality type is X".
I was using that particular item as an example of something that required an explicit decision rather than inference, since the item was "You have an explicit personality type for him, something like MBTI or the Big Five".
@josh Oh, I see, I didn't notice that that was already an option. I'll resolve that one based on whether it was true when the option was first submitted. So, if I didn't have one at first, but come up with one now, then it resolves NO, but if I already had one when the option was submitted, it resolves YES.
I want to wait for the options to get more traders before resolving them, but currently, the only one that even has five traders is the chaotic neutral option.
Also, I find it funny that the market is currently confident that he's either lawful neutral or chaotic neutral, but isn't sure which one. Though the market also thinks that he has a higher chance of being either lawful neutral or chaotic neutral than he does of simply being non-evil.
@PlasmaBallin I think we need more information about him to make this market more interesting. Do you have more pictures ? Or can you post some transcripts of how he talks ?