DM screen or no DM screen? That is the question...

[yennico]

I think the screen is important for hiding notes/papers/special DM maps, etc.

However, for dice rolling, it could be screen or no-screen, depending on style of the game. But whichever you choose, be consistent.

I agree with fba827 and also with JoeGKushner

Dice rolling in the open is something I do when important life and death rolls are being made sometimes but to be honest, as a GM, sometimes I cheat. There's no point in having a player get aced by a lucky goblin who got a critical in my campaign unless the player did something really stupid and the laws of averages will eventually kill almost any character so cheating is sometimes in order for my group.

As a GM (unfortunately not as palyer ) I roll to many natural 20 and criticials. I want a tough and challenging fight, but I do not want to kill any PCs because of a lucky die roll. If they do something stupid they I do not cheat for their benefit.

Just my 2 cents
yennico

 

[Henry]

Another idea that Vivictus' thread brings up is the concept of "DM Cheating" - one that has been debated on this board many times in the past. Some gamers consider it "cheating" if a DM does not abide by the results of each and every roll that is made; others do not take as strict an approach on this.

In our games, I have been alternating between rolling in the open, versus rolling behind a screen, with the emphasis towards open rolls. However, I also don't consider it cheating if a DM uses closed rolls, because the DM is the one in ultimate control of the environment; the players hear and see what the DM tells them they do. If a DM wishes to "cheat" in such a way that he feels betters the game, by either fudging a roll, or by simply decreeing what a roll is, and the players are still enjoying themselves with the results, then the game is bettered as a result. Looking at it another way, the DM has control of the AC's & skill totals of opponents, and the DC's of tasks, so having control of the opponents' die rolls is not that much of a stretch.

The player's, on the other hand, do not have control of the DC's of tasks, nor control of their opponents' proficiency; part of the fun of the game to me is the challenge of making do with the die rolls at hand, and winning the day despite bad fortune. That said, the gaming group may prefer a house rule where the players also have a number of "cheats" at their disposal; in fact, games such as Spycraft, d20 Modern, and the new Savage Worlds game assume it right into the system!

Impartiality is essential to a DM; however, making sure that players are having a good time, and not unfairly shafted by persistant bad luck is also essential to good DM'ing. I have learned many lessons in my DM'ing, and the most important one is that people do not drive from 30 minutes to an hour and a half to a game, in order to blow 15 die rolls in a row, fail in the end, and watch other players have fun because they can roll well and you can't. It pays sometimes to obey the spirit of the law, rather than its letter, and it comes under the balancing act of being a good DM.

 

[HellHound]

I use a screen to conceal maps and NPC sheets, as well as for quick reference of some rules.

I rarely, if ever, roll behind the screen.

When fudging becomes a factor, I just reduce the monster's strength bonus to damage more often than not.



Which is still damn rare. Although I had to do it at the end of Life's Bazaar. Kazmojen was re-enacting that CheapAss Game - Bitin' Off Heads.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I like DM Screens, I just wish I could get one in a "half-height" version. I don't like having too much of my view of the table or players blocked. Often times I'll stand during fights so I can move around, move miniatures, describe the battle, etc.

I roll my dice behind the screen for the most part. For certain big moments, I'll roll the dice out on the battlemat in front of everyone, for an important NPC saving throw, or a vital crit confirmation, etc.

Rolling all dice in front of the players divulges too much information. Personally, I can tell within a couple of rounds what level an NPC is from the die rolls, his strength, just about anything related to melee. It's all a process of elimination, and it takes away a little too much of the mystery.

And of course, my players trust me not to screw them over, which is a vital component of that.

 

[Painfully]

I use a screen, but almost never for the info on them. Rather, I use it as a kind of display board where I clip important notes, both for the players (on the outside), and for myself.

NPCs, maps, and important random encounters are often on my side of the DM screen, while pictures of NPCs, maps of known areas, and perhaps some reminders of important clues are showing in the direction of the players.

What I really like for keeping my notes in are 10-page bound sheet protectors with blank sheets on the outside so I can easily close them during breaks. I use one bound set of pages for friendlies, and another set for enemies.

I always show off a lot of pictures to my players. For treasures, NPCs, monsters (thanks to WotC's art galleries), wild animals/familiars, and, when I can find the right one, scenery of locations they are visiting. Pictures are soooo much easier than reading off a paragraph of description.

 

[Henry]

Often times I'll stand during fights so I can move around, move miniatures, describe the battle, etc.

I have found myself standing all the time now in games when I DM. I learned that

1) Standing during combats and scene descriptions helps the players be more active - it encourages more enthusiasm from me, which encourages more enthusiasm from them.

2) Getting out from behind the screen and standing or sitting with them at one of the positions of the table, instead of at the head of the table, changes the dynamic of the game.

Haiiro's idea about a screen at a separate table is a good one, if one has the space to do it.

 

[The_Gneech]

I have a three-ring binder that's designed for use by sales people and such, that folds out in such a way that my notes are standing and I can see them, that acts as a "screen" for my adventure info. Then, on a tray to the side, I have a DM screen set up that has the minis or scenery pieces I intend to use, hidden from the players, and it's where I do any dice rolling I want to keep hidden.

I seem to remember hearing, there is going to be a 3.5 DM screen in the next Dragon Magazine; I wonder if it'll be on properly heavy material, or if it'll be flimsy.

What irks me about DM screens, is the dopey choices of tables the designers usually make to put on them. I've had DM screens that put things like character creation tables, spell lists, and experience award tables on them -- but no combat tables.

My 3.5e DM screen, whether it's made by WotC or my own self, is going to include a "character condition summary" table (with blocks for fatigued, exhausted, blinded, deafened, silenced, etc.), a summary of the grappling rules ('cause nobody in my group has a handle on those, still), and so forth. What things do you like to have on yours? And do you ever actually look at them?

-The Gneech

 

[Tanstaafl]

What irks me about DM screens, is the dopey choices of tables the designers usually make to put on them. I've had DM screens that put things like character creation tables, spell lists, and experience award tables on them -- but no combat tables.
[/B]

I'll second that... for the table-top Spycraft game that I run I use an old Star Wars screen & have taped pages on the insides... in the center two panels I have a chart about combat conditions and subdual damage, one about cover and concealment, one for attack modifiers, one with all the stats for different kinds of doors. The outer two panels have information about the varios home-brew alien races and important NPCs... I use at least some portion of the screen every time we game.

I like have the information close at hand and the ability to keep my charts of the Mastermind's secret bases hidden; however, I don't like the physical obstacle between me and my players. I tend to view running the game as a chance to share the story with the players and provide them with interesting encounters & challanges (and not as a GC vs. the players grudge match).

I roll behind the screen... my players have never asked to see what I've rolled and I don't check my players rolls.

Our group rotates games & GCs... when other people run the game, they generally use a screen as well.

 

[Arnwyn]

I always use a DM screen, for multiple reasons.

I like the information on them, which is often valuable (though I like the suggestion by The_Gneech). I also use the screen to hide my notes and especially maps - no need for the players to see how large that dungeon *really* is.

Finally, I use the screen to hide my rolls. I *never* roll in front of the players unless it's something simple like a percentage roll that something will happen, or someone will be targeted, etc. Otherwise, attack, damage, saves, and skill rolls are always hidden. The reason for this is that there would be way too much metagaming on the players' side if they saw the rolls. They'd see what the d20 roll would be and what AC I hit, and automatically know what the opponent's attack bonus was. Same with damage (both damage dice and bonus), saves, and skill bonuses. The players should learn such things through combat - after a bunch of rounds (and multiple encounters, if necessary), they will learn what AC a particular monster can hit on average, how much damage it usually does, etc.

Different styles for different groups.

 

[takyris]

Not to hijack, but here's one for thought:

If you do use a screen, that implies that you make some (or most?) rolls behind the screen, so that the players can't see them.

Currently, I let my PCs roll everything themselves. I roll my monster attacks and saves and hide checks behind the screen. It's had the somewhat bummerful effect of having the players take different actions depending on whether their ranger rolled a "2" or an "18" on his Spot check. In the first case, they tend to say, "Well, I don't see anything, but let's be careful nonetheless." In the second case, they tend to say, "Nope, s'all clear, relax and hunt for loot..." Not all players, mind you, and some players get annoyed when the ranger does exactly this behavior.

In my next campaign, I'm going to be changing... not rules, but some of our gameplay. I plan on "taking back" some of the rolls as the DM. d20 Modern lists rolls that the DM should feel free to do himself and hide from players, even when it's players making the roll. I believe that they list:

Bluff
Demolitions (setting explosives)
Diplomacy
Disable Device
Disguise
Hide
Investigate
Listen
Move Silently
Search
Spot

Those are skills for which the PC does not have the ability to gauge how well they are doing without outside information (like having orcs suddenly start throwing spears at them when they thought they were hidden very well). If you try to Bluff someone into letting you into their hideout, and they attack, they MIGHT be attacking because you blew your Bluff check, but they MIGHT be attacking because they had information about you already, and the whole deal with you thinking you could sneak in was a big ol' trap. That's kind of a nice distinction to NOT let the players make on their own, via the "Well, I rolled a 16, so they obviously knew we were coming" route.

How many DMs roll these things for the players -- or make the players roll it but not look at it or something weird like that?