We're all too familiar with a two-dice-roll experiment where we start with a uniform sample space of $S_{die}=\{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ and end up in a non-uniform pmf for the sum of the numbers on the two faces with $S_{sum}=\{2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12\}$
What I'm confused is that why the mapping of the faces to RV values not discussed in introductory discussion?
What if we assume for the second die (call it an "incdie" or increment die): $S_{incdie}=\{2,3,4,5,6,7\}$ ?
Well you'd say the results of the experiment don't change except for a shift in the sample space of the sum: $S_{sum}=\{3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13\}$. Fair enough.
But now what if the second die is a "decadie": $S_{decadie}=\{10,20,30,40,50,60\}$
This completely wrecks the experiment! e.g., first-die-outcome-1 + second-die-outcome-3 ($1 + 30 = 31$) is no longer equal to first-die-outcome-3 + second-die-outcome-1 ($3 + 10 = 13$). As a result, the pmf of the sum is not longer a pyramid shape, but a uniform pmf just like that of its constituents.
edit: I guess the question would be: what is the point of this "incomplete example" that is so prevalent in 90% of the texts? Because without the comprehensive discussion of its variations and caveats, I don't really understand the message being conveyed. I'm only more confused than before.