Secret skill checks, DM or player rolls?

[Ashrum the Black]

Hmm, I let me PC's make all of their rolls themselves. But I make them roll lot's of oddball roles to keep them on their toes.

I have three quarters of my party terrified of a small pool of brackish water because they had to make a fort check when they walked through it. Now, some of them are talking about getting a cure disease spell cast when they get back to town, "just in case".

I love it!

 

[UD]

My party is mainly good when it comes to skill checks. Except the rogue on search rolls. So thats the only ones I roll.

 

[SableWyvern]

I think it is only suggested, and not a fixed rule. If your players are hard-core roleplayers, you really don't need to hide any checks from them, because they will have their characters act the same as if you hadn't just asked them to roll a spot check.

Most of the time, the DM should spare his players the temptation and just roll on his own.

I agree that in an ideal world, player knowledge shouldn't effect character actions...

But,

I think that even with great roleplayers, DM rolls have two important benefits.

First is added enjoyment for the players. I still recall fondly the reactions of surprise, shock, dismay and mirth when, during a tense negotiation with a sphinx, the character downing his supposed potion of glibness suddenly assumed gaseous form. The player involved may well have made the same decision for his character if he had known the potion was misidentified, but the situation would have been far less enjoyable if an alternate effect was expected.

Second is the fact that it can be hard, if not impossible, to determine how much player knowledge has subconsciously affected character decisions. The more a player knows that his character doesn't, the harder he has to work to roleplay well. In some cases, a good roleplayer will be tempted to err on the side of PC-detriment, just to ensure that he isn't using his player knowledge (eg - I think my character would do this; hmm... but maybe I wouldn't have even thought of that if I didn't already know this... etc...). That IMO, is no better in effect than bad roleplayers utilising every scrap of player info that they can.

 

[mayonnaise]

Best I've seen

The best method I have ever seen came out of either Shadowrun or Cyberpunk, I forget which. It requires some prep work by the DM, but after that it is easy, and works really well.

Make a cheat sheet with the skill modifiers of all your players for the skill checks to want to make in secret. Then you have all the approp. modifiers to work with, and you can still have your players roll the dice...they just don't know what they are rolling for.

Example;

Bob/Redgar
Spot: 5
Search: 4
Listen: 2
Hide: 3
Move Silent: 4

When you want to make a secret Spot check, tell Bob to toll a d20, then add his character's modifier, and you get the result you want without the player knowing what it was for. No one is unhappy about not being able to make their own rolls I think it's more fun from a player persepective because even though you might be a good group of roleplayers and not metagame knowing what the roll is for, knowing what you had to roll for takes some of the surprise out of it.

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

I think that it is detrimental to play to make the players roll things that give them metagame knowledge. Sure, if they are good roleplayers they won't act on it; but isn't it better if they don't even have to worry about acting or not acting? Isn't it more fun if they can just do what their characters would do without having to wonder if they are subconsiously "cheating"?

And what if a theif fails a disarm device check? Isn't it mean to make the player open the door when he knows darn well it is going to hurt him. It just seems to me that it would be more fun for all involved if the player honestly thought the door were safe - right up until it exploded in his face. It's less stressful on the players and more fun for everyone involved.


If the players do insists on rolling their own dice, then roll a 6 sider behind the screen when they do. On a 1-2, let the roll stand. On a 3-4, add 10 and wrap around the result. On a 5-6, subtract the roll from 21 (reversing the die basically). I would always let natural 1's and 20's stand since sometime you do so well, or so poorly, that it is obvious to everyone involved. Just a thought.

 

[StoneAxe]

Normally I tell the player to roll a D20 and give me the results. Since I have a copy of their sheet behind my screen I make the adjustments myself. This allows the player's luck with dice to come into play and add tension when they try and figure out why they needed to make the roll.

Sometimes I tell them to roll for fun