D&D 5E Are players always entitled to see their own rolls?

[iserith]

Yep, but as I have explained, you are wrong. And that's okay!

FWIW, people metagame in diceless roleplaying games. So, um, yeah.

We're not talking about "metagaming" in those games. We're speaking about a particular kind of "metagaming" that a lot of people in this thread seem to be concerned about in D&D and for whom secret rolls, extra rolls, and other tricks have been considered a solution. I've shown how my methods don't require any of that in order to arrive at a curtailment of that kind of "metagaming," by removing the opportunity in the first place.

If you don't believe my methods achieve that goal, please show how. If you have shown how, please point me to that post as I may have missed it.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Bawylie]

Yeah, ok, if it isn't new and you're that great at it, why do you need a secret roll?

 

[iserith]

First, your position is clear by referring to things as "tricks."

"Tricks," as in "Tricks of the Trade." You seem to be taking an uncharitable view when interpreting my tone.

Second, your position doesn't remove "meta-gaming." You have two tricks that you employ-
a. You get rid of most dice rolls. This removes some element of uncertainty with DM-railroading (or "shared narrative adventure" if you prefer).

I strive to balance the use of dice against deciding on success or failure as indicated by "The Middle Path" in the DMG (pages 236-237). Interestingly, this is the only approach to the role of the dice that the DMG suggests has no drawbacks.

So I refute the assertion that I "get rid of most dice rolls." As well, there is no standard by which we can judge what "most dice rolls" means, since not every action a player describes has an uncertain outcome by default.

b. When dice are rolled in the open, you just use narrative tricks and assume the results are obvious. "You found the secret door, but you wasted so much time a monster found you." Again, you remove the element of surprise (or as you call it, metagaming) by just forcing your narrative interpretations on the party.

This is "progress combined with a setback" or "success at a cost," both of which are found in the PHB and DMG, respectively. I have provided specific examples of their usage (the secret door exchange that The Jester commented on) that removes the opportunity for the sort of "metagaming" that posters in this thread do not appear to enjoy.

Edit: It's also not clear what you mean by "you remove the element of surprise." Will you kindly explain?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Psikerlord#]

I believe secrets rolls do sometimes make the game better, and I use them.

Example: PC is using insight against an NPC who is lying to them. PC is highly skilled, say +9, and rolls a 17 (26) in the open. DM rolls behind the screen and gets a 18 and the NPC is secretly a master spy, adds +9 (27). Result is "you cant read him".

Just by seeing his own roll of 17, and knowing he is good at insight, and getting the "cant read him" result, this player has now been tipped off that there is something special about this NPC.

If the DM made the roll for the PC however, this situation is avoided. The PC just gets the "cant read him" result without knowing his roll was 17.

Is there a better way to avoid this kind of tip off whilst still letting the player roll in the open?

 

[iserith]

No drawbacks. None at all.

That is what the DMG says, as compared to methods where the DM calls for a lot of checks or very few which it suggests can come with specific drawbacks.

Out of curiosity, do you normally just declare yourself a winner, or just keep going until everyone else get tired and goes elsewhere? Because I will state again for like, the 10th time-

There's nothing at stake to win. Until you began to become unkind, I thought we were having a discussion.

I think you are wrong. That's okay. Do it as you want. You're not going to convince me. Good luck with that.

You've said you think I'm wrong. It's not clear as to what exactly and why, especially after I have shown your assertions to be unfounded. If you don't care to discuss this further, that's okay. But the door is open if you do. Good luck.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Uchawi]

I think the prime directive of the DM is to get everyone to participate in the story, and whether you have secret rolls or not plays second fiddle to allowing the broadest application of skills as possible. So don't get stuck as a DM on only one type of skill being able to unlock a portion of the story (secret door or otherwise). Eventually you end of with everyone falling asleep while the bard, rogue or wizard tries. You can still make something hard to find, but with more skills on the table, as least the chances are better they will eventually figure it out.

When I did secret rolls as a DM, it just prompted the players to get in paranoid mode, or just ignore it. It is a very fine line to walk.