I think this block is more reasonable but there's a CHANCE(pun intended) be unreasonable to be a new block.

It's basically a chance one (e.g. 50 being the input will have what is put in between have a 50% chance of

AnAccount_StopAsking wrote:

I think this block is more reasonable but there's a CHANCE(pun intended) be unreasonable to be a new block.

It's basically a chance one (e.g. 50 being the input will have what is put in between have a 50% chance of

happening.

Here's a good workaround:

Replace the “…” blocks with the code you want to run

So you are suggesting something like this?

Maximouse wrote:

So you are suggesting something like this?

The workaround isn't right.
It only does the “something” if the chance is a quarter, making it being full chance.

AnAccount_StopAsking wrote:

Maximouse wrote:

So you are suggesting something like this?

Yes

This would actually be useful, because @aKidCalledAris's workaround only works for chances 1/n when n is an integer. The only real workaround I know is

aKidCalledAris wrote:

Here's a good workaround:

Replace the “…” blocks with the code you want to run

Makes sense.

Maximouse wrote:

AnAccount_StopAsking wrote:

Maximouse wrote:

So you are suggesting something like this?

Yes

This would actually be useful, because @aKidCalledAris's workaround only works for chances 1/n when n is an integer. The only real workaround I know is

Yeah, that actually is much better, hehe.

aKidCalledAris wrote:

Maximouse wrote:

AnAccount_StopAsking wrote:

Maximouse wrote:

So you are suggesting something like this?

Yes

This would actually be useful, because @aKidCalledAris's workaround only works for chances 1/n when n is an integer. The only real workaround I know is

Yeah, that actually is much better, hehe.

I prefer yours, but opinion respected.