DM's - What rolls do you make for your players?

[diaglo]

% reaction roll

 

[The Sigil]

I stand in the crowd that says, "the DM makes any roll where success/failure would not be immediately obvious to the character AND knowing whether or not the result was success or failure would have an impact on what the PCs then did."

For example, I make all Spot/Listen/Search checks - because the PCs shouldn't know whether "you don't find anything" is due to a poor roll or because there is nothing there... and if they could see that the roll was poor, they might try again.

Rolls like attack rolls are made by the players - a hit or miss would be immediately obvious. Jump and Climb skills are obvious - either you made the jump or you didn't. Escape Artist - either you're out of the ropes or you aren't (you can't think you are when you're not under most circumstances).

I also let players roll against anything that might directly adversely affect their character - including things like Saves vs. Charm or Compulsion effects (the one bit of metagaming knowledge I allow other players) - because a player should feel that it's THEIR hand that has direct control of their PC, not the DM's. I think a player deserves the benefit of rolling their saves so they can't accuse me of "railroading."

But otherwise, basically, if knowing the numerical result of a particular roll (e.g., a low or high Search roll) would allow the players to metagame, I make the roll and they don't get to see the roll.

IOW, players get to make "action" rolls, DMs get to make "information" rolls where failure may be either the result of a poor roll OR the information sought not existing.

--The Sigil

 

[Arnwyn]

I let the players roll virtually everything, except when it comes to skill rolls - I'm pretty heavy-handed when it comes to skill checks.

Usually it results in the DM rolling all Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Search, and Spot checks at the very least.

Depending on the situation, the DM usually also rolls all Bluff, Intimidate, Intuit Direction, and Sense Motive checks as well.

As for player's responses for "breaking" precedent - well, it depends on how well you communicate the "why's" with them, and how reasonable they are. A frank discussion on why you are rolling them instead of them, along with their input, should go a long way. For example, discussing with them the Search problem you mentioned in a post above is a good start.

 

[Ed Cha]

When I DM (either for my campaign or in RPGA events), I let the players make all of their own rolls. I've been toying with the idea of starting to make some of the rolls for the players. For things like certain spot, search, hide, listen, sense motive, etc checks.

What rolls do you make for your players? Why?

I try to let my players make as many of their own rolls as possible to give a sense of empowerment, but once in a while it's good to make that secret roll if it helps not spoil the plot. You could also just ask them to roll a d20 and calculate their modifiers for them to get a result without their knowing what it's for.

Some DMs even roll all of their dice rolls in front of the players without a screen. I've toyed with this idea, but I see how it could prove to cause some problems. It sounds like fun though.

 

[drothgery]

I'm generally on the side of letting players make rolls unless it's absolutely critical that they don't know about the check if they failed. The main reason for this is convenience; if you aren't making rolls for players, then you don't need to have current copies of their character sheets.

 

[Ashe]

I assign my players a luck score that they don't know about. This rarely comes into play, but those Luck checks that are applicable then come into play and I roll them. Obviously since they don't know about them.

I also roll for the same reasons set forth above, when being forced to make a roll conveys information. Then it is sort of fun to just start rolling dice and scaring players, but that only works for a little while then they are just used to it.

 

[Seonaid]

As a player, I wish my DM would make almost all of my rolls for me. For all of the reasons stated above, there is no way to avoid meta-gaming (unless the *group* is really darn good--note the word "group," not "player"--it really is a group dynamic, as seen above) if the players get to make all/most/some of the rolls. I think my DM doesn't do it because he also rolls the dice manually. Having a page of d20 rolls generated by a program (AOL chat rooms have this function, and anyone can download AIM for free) or even just done up in spare time makes so much more sense, and it doesn't alert the players to the fact that a roll has been made. I think my current group is, for the most part, good enough to not question what a random roll by the DM is, and some times he rolls a bunch of dice for no reason at all (major scare factor when used sparingly), but I think it's better to have a sheet of pre-rolled numbers and cross them off as you go. I wish my DM would let *us* do that, but I've asked and he refuses.

Speaking of which . . . do any of you (DM's) allow pre-rolled numbers? It would speed things up so much. Have a sheet of 20's, and then various amounts of the other dice based on how often they're used. Especially during combat, when a lot of time is spent figuring out what the action is, not to mention rolling several attacks, or whatnot. It bogs.

 

[Rashak Mani]

Well its obvious that the skill rolls are more "controversial" and I have done a mix of the two DM styles mentioned:

1. DM rolls... players are kept ignorant
2. DM asks for rolls more often too keep players "used to" frequent rolls.

I feel the first method is better in that it keeps players on their toes. When I do ask players to roll I might ask them to roll behind my screen so they use their "luck" and I get to hide the results too.

 

[Sam]

Speaking of which . . . do any of you (DM's) allow pre-rolled numbers? It would speed things up so much. Have a sheet of 20's, and then various amounts of the other dice based on how often they're used. Especially during combat, when a lot of time is spent figuring out what the action is, not to mention rolling several attacks, or whatnot. It bogs.

I've seen this discussed alot, and have not gotten over the fact that, at least for me, a big component of playing D&D is rolling dice. If I were a player at a table, and I didn't see a DM rolling anything, just explaining what the result was, I would look upon it a bit strangely. Not to say I wouldn't trust the DM, but it just isn't how the game is supposed to be played (for me). Besides, if I were to use a die roller program to generate & print a hundred d20 rolls, what would I do with my Pound O' Dice?

 

[Seonaid]

Mmm . . . Good point. I spoke too rashly.