We are not Dice.SE. It should be closed
(according to how our current site is scoped)
Here's what the tour has to say about the purpose and mission of this site:
RPG Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. We cater to hundreds of tabletop RPGs including D&D, Fate, GURPS, World of Darkness, and more. RPG Stack Exchange is built and run by you as part of the Stack Exchange network of Q&A sites. With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed answers to every question about role-playing games.
Right now, we have defined ourselves as a site laser-focused on one narrow slice of Q&A content: stuff inherently about RPGs.
This question explicitly is not about RPGs:
This question is not actually related to RPGs but is more of a real-world dice rolling scenario I'm looking for help with, from dice rolling experts.
I'm currently memorizing the Book of Psalms, which is divided into 150
I'm looking for an analog, elegant way of quizzing myself, by rolling
some number of dice (or whatever means, really, just nothing digital)
to get a random (equally likely) number from 1 to 150.
It is about dice and statistics for the purpose of memorizing psalms. This is a lovely and commendable question, but this site isn't built to field questions requiring only general expertise in dice just like we also don't field questions about graphic design not related to RPGs, social problems not occurring in an RPG context, and pure math/statistics problems.
This question again explicitly had nothing to do with RPGs. We are not dice.SE. We wouldn't handle questions about Liar's Dice, identifying what version of Monopoly a set of dice came from, or Statistics 101 homework problems about dice probability. Nor should we be accepting question about solving everyday problems with dice.
Changing the scope could allow these types of questions
Now, dice questions explicitly not about RPGs don't have to always be off-topic here, but by our current definition they are. If we want them to be something that is allowed and encouraged here, we are going to have to have a discussion about widening the scope of the site to allow them and come up with a proper definition of what is allowed and what isn't.
No matter what the scope of the site is, it should be widely understood and agreed upon such that we can manage the site content to remain focused on that scope. Doing so allows us to keep our noise level very low and to maintain a high level of interesting and relevant content for our target audience.
The lack of a migration target has no effect on what is considered on-topic
It is good to remember that even if a question may not fit on any other Stack, it does not mean we have to default to expanding our core focus to "adopt" them. The presence or lack thereof of a migration target does not at all factor into what we consider on topic here.
Not every question has a Stack that has the focus and expertise to answer it. And that is inherently a characteristic that comes from how the focused Q&A sites of Stack Exchange are built.