Does your DM hide their rolls?

[Badapple]

Ugh.

In the short run I can understand the temptation for a DM to fudge a little. But in the long run it actually cheapens the game and hurts suspense.

As a player I hate it when my DM's fudge. I've played a long time and I'm usually savvy enough to pick up on it, given enough time playing with the same group. Because I hate it as a player, I don't do it as a DM... no matter how strong the short run temptation.

Most DM's usually mean well with the fudge, but the best games for me are the ones where the dice fall where they may. Some fights wind up being utter cakewalks, some bloodbaths, most are still in between. But that uncertainty is always there, lurking, providing much more excitement in the long run when you just don't know what's going to happen.

 

[Kzach]

Most DM's usually mean well with the fudge, but the best games for me are the ones where the dice fall where they may. Some fights wind up being utter cakewalks, some bloodbaths, most are still in between. But that uncertainty is always there, lurking, providing much more excitement in the long run when you just don't know what's going to happen.

Most definitely.

All the most exciting combats I've ever played through or DM'd have involved a lot of bad or a lot of good, luck.

I love that 4e has a lot of strategy to it and that a smart, tactically minded group can really plow through encounters. But every so often, the dice are against them, and an encounter becomes suddenly much more difficult and challenging because of it.

And I love it when you manage to get through a combat by the utter skin of your teeth. Every single roll matters and everyone is hoping the next roll misses against them or the next roll hits the monster 'cause it's those few rolls that make all the difference.

DM's fudging dice just steals that experience away from everyone. Without the real threat of character death, you may as well just go read a book or play a CRPG where you can go back to a saved game.

 

[Jhaelen]

Well, I always roll in the open.

If I want to fudge, I may play the opposition not as clever as they might have acted otherwise, i.e. have them make tactical mistakes. But fudging die rolls? Not necessary.

 

[Starfox]

Not trying to turn this into an edition war, but I think these comments do relate to how 4E differs from other games.

And I love it when you manage to get through a combat by the utter skin of your teeth. Every single roll matters and everyone is hoping the next roll misses against them or the next roll hits the monster 'cause it's those few rolls that make all the difference.

I don't agree. I feel there are too many die rolls in 4E. With so many rolls, none of them really matter; statistics makes it all pan out in the end. 4E is, even more than earlier editions, a game of attrition where the only result on the combat results table is "exchange". This was true in earlier editions at higher levels, but it is more true in 4E.

DM's fudging dice just steals that experience away from everyone. Without the real threat of character death, you may as well just go read a book or play a CRPG where you can go back to a saved game.

I find this sentiment common among 4E players. Combined with the earlier quote, my reflection is that 4E has little enough randomness to permit this kind of play to succeed. As a DM, if you use a level +4 encounter, you can be fairly sure its going to be "skin of your teeth" not "team wipe" - and the suspense is still there. For this to work, statistics have to "pan out in the end". I guess this is something 4E succeeded at - but also a point where it alienated some players.

For the opposite paradigm, try high-level Rune Quest. Most attacks in high-level Rune Quest had no effect whatsoever. Sure, they did hit, but they were also parried. They did a lot of damage, but this damage was absorbed by shields and armor. But the exceptional did happen. If one side scored a critical hit (a one-hit-in-20-event) and the other failed to parry (also a one-in-20-event at high levels), the attack went right trough all the beefed-up armor without losing any of its damage enhancers. Instant kill was the likely result. Compared to DnD, a fight in Runequest took about as long - only it was a low odds sudden death system rather than an attrition system.

My personal opinion is that high level fights in Runequest sucked and that high level D&D (all editions) works much better. Still, I feel 4E has gone too far in the direction of "pan out in the end".

 

[babinro]

As a DM I hide rolls. I will at times fudge critical rolls into regular hits. This is only really done during strings of criticals and as such is extremely rare.

I've also done the opposite, if a boss fight turns boring because it misses for 3+ straight rounds due to bad luck, I will sometimes consider the rolls for blasts/bursts as a natural 7, rather than the 1-2-3 I rolled. This ensures that the attack may hit some PC's, while others will be fine. Again, a rarity, but one done to make the battle more interesting.

 

[Wormwood]

Out in the open, like everyone else.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Just curious as to the general rule at your table. Are the DM's rolls out in the open for all to see, or hidden? Have any issues come up? In our game all DM rolls are out in the open, which we all seem to prefer. Personally, I don't like it when the DM fudges a roll in my favor. Feels like I'm cheating ...

Sort of hidden.
My DM (and I when I DM) rolls multiple dice (usually 4), having already chosen one of them without saying which it is. All dice are then rolled in the open but only the DM knows which one is important.

 

[Blackbrrd]

As a DM I hide rolls. I will at times fudge critical rolls into regular hits. This is only really done during strings of criticals and as such is extremely rare.

I've also done the opposite, if a boss fight turns boring because it misses for 3+ straight rounds due to bad luck, I will sometimes consider the rolls for blasts/bursts as a natural 7, rather than the 1-2-3 I rolled. This ensures that the attack may hit some PC's, while others will be fine. Again, a rarity, but one done to make the battle more interesting.

You are supposed to roll one to-hit roll for each target, but use the same damage roll.

 

[Ryujin]

Our usual DM rolls openly. I hide my rolls, when I run the game. IMHO a little fudging, both for and against, can make it a more enjoyable experience for the players.

 

[Benlo]

I do it behind the screen. One, it's more convenient than reaching over the screen to get my dice back, and two, it's fun to me to reveal dicerolls.