"can" denotes possibility. From your example, I could say "you can roll a 6 on a 6 sided die." That's a true statement and is distinctly different from "you will roll a 6 on a 6 sided die."

Now, I could also say "you can roll 100 sixes in 100 rolls of a 6 sided die." Still true, technically, but astronomically rare. So much so that if you threw dice your whole life, you'd almost certainly never hit it. So I decided not to lean on just what was technically possible, but what was

*reasonably *possible.

Let's take the statement "you can roll at least 17 sixes in 100 roles of a 6 sided die." Seems a lot more reasonable, but how do you support such a supposition? The odds of rolling a 6 on a 6 sided die are 1/6 which is ~16.7%. Over 100 rolls, on average, you would have 16.7 sixes. From there it's easy to estimate that you'll roll at least 17 sixes a little less than half the time, which to me is reasonably possible (ie not a statistical anomaly). That's all I did in my analysis, just there were more calculations involved because the odds were different depending on the raid makeup. Now, you can argue that my analysis is inaccurate because of the assumptions I used (since it would take an inordinate amount of time to gather the actual numbers) and I've already agreed to as much.