rogue rules


log in or register to remove this ad


I always roll hide/move silently rolls, because I got really sick of hearing "Can you see me?" as one player turns to another. For hidden rolls in the past, like spot and search, I had each player roll a d20 20 times and give me a sheet of paper with those numbers on them, then I randomly pick a row and use that number. May not be the most mathematically sound usage in the latter case, but the players then get to roll for themselves, and I maintain the secret rules without them having any knowledge a die roll took place (plus no sound to give it away either).
 

I make my DM roll all the non-contested skill checks. I tell him the modifier and let him tell me what the character sees/experiences.

It saves me from having to resist the meta-gaming temptation.
 

You bought the rules. You can do anything you want to them. *nods* sounds like a good mechanich to me to increase tention with the cost being a reduced pace of play.
 

Hypersmurf said:
Is it just me, or does "Rogue Rules" sound like a new Reality TV series where the audience get to share in the everyday activities of ten people living in a Thieves' Guild Headquarters for a month?
-Hyp.

They did something like that. But they never even got past the 1st day because the cameras and all the equipment kept disappering :D

Janos Antero said:
I always roll hide/move silently rolls, because I got really sick of hearing "Can you see me?" as one player turns to another.

Well, that problem's history, as hide and move silently are now opposed rolls: it doesn't matter whether the other party members can see you, since it's the enemies that have to make the critical spot and listen checks.

For hidden rolls in the past, like spot and search, I had each player roll a d20 20 times and give me a sheet of paper with those numbers on them, then I randomly pick a row and use that number. May not be the most mathematically sound usage in the latter case, but the players then get to roll for themselves, and I maintain the secret rules without them having any knowledge a die roll took place (plus no sound to give it away either).

They rolled something. The fact that they cannot decide what value is used when means they don't really roll themselves.

Also, it's pure fun for the DM just to roll a d20 or d%. Maybe raise a brow or something. Make that regularly and you have the players on their edge.
 

IMO it can ruin the game if the DM doesn't roll some skills for the player. For example, if the DM asks you for an opposed roll for your sense motive and you are in a social interaction you can pretty much guess that something is amiss. There is always the option of the DM then asking for these rolls at random times, but this just wastes time. Even if your DM asks you to just roll a d20, you know something is happening.

You can try and avoid the metagaming by not acting like your character knows something is up (I will just concede that that is possible in the first place). However, even if you do it still changes the flow of the game because now you have to think from the metagame perspective.

I find it to be most fun when I play my PC how I would play him the whole time rather than taking a step back and pretending like I did not know something. Moreover, in this sense of gaming, it is actually possible to feel (I am talking about the player now) the emotions the chracter might. For example, my DM (in RttToEE) excellently pulled off a betrayal and I felt angry. If we had gone ahead and done opposed rolls I would have known there was something up even if my character didn't and would not have been able to enjoy (as ironic as that sounds) the experience of roleplaying the betrayed character. When I confronted our group's betrayer it was all the more intense because I felt the previous betrayal and was able to incorporate that into the PC's interactions.
 

Remove ads

Top