QUOTE(kserox @ Sep 16 2013, 21:23)

Huh (IMG:[
invalid]
style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) I was pretty sure that we have chaining rolls here (i.e. if second roll is FALSE then no third roll).
Looks like I was wrong.
Indeed, many of the word choice of Tenboro when it come to the patch note (whether intentional or not...) can be easily misinterpreted if you just take a quick, casual glance at it, including this time around. (IMG:[
invalid]
style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
But if you read carefully at this paragraph :
QUOTE(Tenboro @ Sep 14 2013, 18:11)

Zero successful rolls will (obviously) not reduce damage. One successful roll decreases received damage by 50%, increasing to 75% and 90% for two and three successful rolls.
The key word here is 'Zero successful rolls', which implied that resist chance are rolls more than
once, and
ALL of them
can fail. And by this deduction, you could see that it is not possible for it to be a 'chaining rolls' model since a single failure would terminate the rolling process— the only possible model that would fit is that the game always rolls 3 times.
BTW, ain't anyone gonna do a simple math check on my probability? (IMG:[
invalid]
style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) ... I
really don't know whether it's correct or not; this shit can be tricky at time for someone like me, yah know.... (IMG:[
invalid]
style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)