[rintakumpu]

Play with a deck of cards instead of dice! 36 cards, six sevens, five eights and sixes and so on.

[andrepd]

I actually did a similar thing using a python script! shuffle(all_combinations[: -10]), and repeat forever. Change the -10 to whatever you want: take everything and you've got your solution, put -35 and you've got random dice again. -10 is a nice middle term, also avoids that at the end of the deck results become too certain.

[jack_pp]

How is that supposed to help? A bad run is a bad run no matter the randomizer. Also cards need to be shuffled which wastes time if done correctly

[ben_w]

A deck of cards behaves the way the gambler's fallacy expects everything to behave: after enough bad luck, you're sure to get a good result.

[samatman]

I've taken to calling that the gambler's fallacy fallacy: the misapprehension that a randomness can only arise in situations where the events are uncorrelated. The randomness in Tetris is another good example: when you think you're due for an I, you actually are.

[andrepd]

Tetris actually uses two entirely different algorithms, one classic and one modern. Classic is randint(1,7), modern is shuffling "decks" of the 7 pieces and repeating.