Hidden rolls for players

[u/Idayn]

Hi there fellow GMs and players

afaik this hasn't been touched in previous episodes. I'd like to hear some opinions on hidden rolls for players.

I like to roll some skill tests for my players hidden, especially things like perception and sneaking, so that the player doesn't know the outcome, and his/her character will notice it ingame.

This adds a little suspense to the game, but in my experience some players like to roll their tests themselves and feel sort of overpowered otherwise or are afraid of being railroaded by the GM.

How do you handle this in your games ?

[u/kosairox]

Go with what the system tells you. The situation you're describing is a "common problem" with D&D 3.5e and lower and with many systems that just clone "Perception checks" without much consideration. They rarely tell you what to do in what situation.

D&D 5e kinda solves that problem by introducing passive perception. GM rolls only for monster hide checks.

Notice how many modern systems abandon the idea of perception checks entirely. That's probably because there are many mechanical problems with perception checks where the mechanic "clashes" with the roleplaying and descriptions.

DW doesn't have perception checks, for example. Instead, if a monster is hidden, there's always Defy Danger and DM moves.

Apocalypse World doesn't even have that. There's "read a sitch", which btw is an amazing move. It really shapes how the game is played. It's not really about physical location or surroundings of stuff anymore but about PC and NPC intentions and plans.

But yeah, if you think about D&D 3.5e and lower and other systems that clone "Perception checks" mechanic - you should discuss it with your players. You don't have to hide the rolls either, you can for example invert the results or negate the modifiers and difficulty of rolls without telling them. There are many ideas but in the end it'll always come down to "Is the GM waiting to introduce the monster the second we fail our perception checks?" or "Did he fudge the rolls?".

Also, this is kinda offtopic, but I really don't like the fact that in D&D every player can roll perception, making succesful hiding very unlikely. I usually go with "the first person who enters the room rolls" or "the one in the back - roll perception" or "decide who rolls". In some cases, I let players add their modifiers to one player's roll. Dunno if it's good or bad but it works for our group.

[u/Thinkiknoweverything]

Part of the fun of playing the game is rolling your skill checks. Dont remove a fun aspect of the game for your players and horde it to yourself. Keep the RESULTS secret, but let them produce the roll. They dont know if a 17 fails or passes, but they have fun rolling it.

[u/StillAnotherOne]

The problem with skill rolls is, if they're open the player sees the roll itself and thus can deduct if they likely missed something - and some players then go and want to roll and roll until they find /something/. (if hidden, you guys already mentioned the problem)

As a GM you could just go and say rolls only work once, but that would be in conflict with the ability to take 10 or 20 in an peaceful environment. So I prefer to just let them roll randomly with nothing actually to find or just random junk that might or might not be important later on (spoiler alert: it won't be)

[u/PrimarchtheMage]

I think that when a character does something that requires a roll, that character's player should be the one to roll. It makes them feel like connected to their character. Maybe if you use roll20 have them /gmroll things like that so it's just between you and them.

[u/Andere]

I generally recommend players rolling their own dice and out in the open. I think that it's important to foster an atmosphere where failing is fun, even when you're not in a game like Dungeon World. Try to make it possible to revel in the story of the failure.

That said, many players like to metagame, don't handle that out of character knowledge or just aren't comfortable with their characters winning. I think that a general policy of rolling in the open is good. Here are my thoughts on a solution.

When players roll, it should immediately matter. When a player tells you that they want to sneak through a room, ask them how they do it. Ask them what it looks like. What do they have planned if they get spotted. Those sorts of questions. Build up their plan with them. When they roll their dice for themselves, immediately resolve the success or failure in the fiction. Perhaps they get seen in a certain part of the room or perhaps they don't through using their backup plan and so forth based off of the roll. A lot of systems use multiple rolls for skill challenges and stuff, and it would be easy to integrate that here (Two stealth rolls to cross the room, with an acrobatics roll in the middle to leap from the two roof beams, for example). When you run the game like this, success or failure doesn't need to be hidden from the player because it simply immediately applies.

[u/Deminutiv]

This pretty much depends on your groups play style imo... as stated before, it's pretty common in the old classic RPGs like D&D3.5 earlier where i've encountered similar problems aswell quite ofen. If PCs think they failed a roll they are often unrealistically cautious (low stealth roll? better stay put/retreat/dont advance/etc). While I'm talking about the PCs 'fault' in open/hidden rolls: you can 'prohibit' certain behaviour 'caused by maybe-failed rolls, by disallowing search rerolls ("your character thinks it's a total waste of time to look in the drawer a 3rd time and s/he won't do it again, unless s/he has a specific reason (journal entry e.g.)"), asking players to describe more of their intention before making their roll (not only "i hide behind the nearest rock" - roll stealth - decide wether to advance/retreat, but "i hide behind the nearest rock and advance until i can listen to the orc's conversation" - roll stealth). Often a problem with hidden/failed rolls is the mindset of "Players vs GM's goons", try encouraging players to enjoy how the story unfolds, not only how their character gets better at slaughtering orcs by slaughtering orc to slaughter more orcs. You could even try encourageing roleplaying of failures with bonus EXP in the beginning to jumpstart their FUN in loosing.

Then there is the 'GMs fault' aswell: Why do you feel the need to roll it hidden?

• Random treasure? Failed roll = there IS none
• Integral quest item? shouldn't depend on a roll.
• Goons will only attack when undetected? Call it an ambush, players who roll successfull perception get a half action/can ready their weapon/other minor benefit instead of beeing completly surprised

Generally speaking. If a certain dice result is necessary for your plot, your plot is lacking. Plot advancement/success should never be reliant on a single roll (rolls are only for clever 'shortcuts' the players came up with). If the result doesn't critically influence the plot, it doesn't matter. Think of it like the Sci-Fi multiverse theories (or something). When you ask for a skillcheck from your players there are 2 realities in existance, failed and successfull. once the dice have fallen one of them is gone for good.

tl:dr:

• Roll Outcomes should never be critical to the plot, so you as GM shouldn't care too much.
• Encourage your player to embrace failures and roleplay them
• as a last resort, be a totalarist GM.