GMMichael
Guide of Modos
I'd like the time-coded URL as proof of this. Because I can't sit through an entire Matt Colville video.I was absolutely furious to learn that Matt Colville not only fudges dice, he pre-rolls dice to ensure that he can lift the screen, point to a die, and say, "See? I rolled it, fair and square" despite this being a total lie.
Providing these "major benefits" would be nice.I understand that this can require extra effort some of the time, e.g. Perception and Insight rolls and whether the players "trust" what the DM tells them. But the major benefits this brings are so much more valuable than the slight extra effort required to handle an only-occasional issue.
Oh, thanks. I wanted to see these, being in the No camp, myself:Because:
- It is a significant gesture of trustworthiness to do so.
- Open rolling removes DM temptation to interfere.
- It encourages DMs to level with their players if something goes wrong, rather than trying to cover it up.
- I find that it leads to better outcomes, and encourages players to take risks, because they will feel their decisions are truly informed.
1. This is a good idea, if for some odd reason the GM needs to establish trustworthiness.
2. The DM's job is to "interfere." Monte Cook calls it an "intrusion," though.
3. Needing examples, here. If this means "PC died," a good DM would own it. #gygaxlives
4. Nothing encourages me more than knowing there's a fair-rolling DM behind the Great Oz's curtain.

Judgy, yeah. But you seem to be talking about Role-Playing-Not-Games. RPG Players compete against GM challenges, the dice, and even each other (hence all the cries for "balance").The judgementalsim about a game that isn't a competition is stunning to me. Wow.
Last edited: