D&D General Should the DM roll in the open?

[soviet]

I find it weird how so many people don't trust their DM.

Most of the people you're talking about are DMs. It's a matter of playstyle.

 

[cbwjm]

Most of the people you're talking about are DMs. It's a matter of playstyle.

Just because they might also DM doesn't make it less weird that they don't trust their DM.

 

[Micah Sweet]

We''ll assume for this question that a DM rolling in the open can occasionally roll behind the screen, e.g. for stealth or other rolls that are preferably concealed.

But for the vast majority of rolls, they roll in front of the players: init, attack rolls, damage, saving throws, most skill checks, ...

I vote yes, but I absolutely reserve the right to use hidden rolls in setting-appropriate circumstances, as the OP indicated.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Just because they might also DM doesn't make it less weird that they don't trust their DM.

On the contrary, it means that we know each other's shenanigans.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The question posed is 'Should the DM roll out in the open'... in other words is this something all DMs are meant to be doing? Thus my answer is an easy 'No'-- there is no 'Should' in this instance. Some DMs can do so... while some DMs can choose not to. But there should not be a requirement either way. Doing one or the other exclusively does not make for a better game at every table.

Are there valid reasons to do so? Absolutely. Are there valid reasons not to do so? Also absolutely. There is no singular answer that applies to every table and every game across the entire gamut of D&D players, and thus the question to me has an easy response.

This is actually a better answer.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why is it that some folks absolutely must argue the "should" when it is obvious by context that no attempt to set down a universal doctrine is being made?

The poster is asking you what you do. Why not just answer the question that is asked?

For my part: i am a "all combat rolls in the open" type GM, and most other rolls. I will use players rolling in the tower (ie they are rolling hut they don't know what they got) when using a VTT that has that capability, but at the table I usually have them roll things like perception in the open (but not necessarily against a revealed DC).

In all fairness, "should" does indicate a non-subjective stance, or at least one encompassing more than just yourself.

 

[Micah Sweet]

We also roll death saves in secret often to build up the suspense of not knowing how someone is doing. I do give descriptions, particularly if a 1 is rolled.

However, unless immediately pressed by the PCS, I have many creatures double-tap downed PCs to kill them instantly. That might sound harsh, but in a world were the dead can virtually get back up and into the fight, taking a round or two to make sure that isn't likely to happen seems worth it.

Players quickly learn to get to the aid of others, or at least get them out of immediate danger--as it should be IMO.

I agree that death saves should be a secret roll. Hard to get players on board with that though, since it's all they get to do on their turn.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I feel like this discussion usually simplifies into a discussion between those that prefer to focus on the "game" aspect of RPGs (roll in the open) and those that focus more on role-playing/storytelling (those that want a shield with which to fudge). As said, that is a generalization but I think it is more often true than not.

To me, even when we are engaged in a deliberate act of storytelling, RPGs are fundamentally games first, and one of the unique and interesting aspect of (most) RPGs is how the uncertainty built into dice informs the story aspect. I want the dice to surprise me, and I like to play games where the dice have a lot of input in the outcome of things.

The acronym "RPG" pretty clearly indicates that the roleplaying comes first.

 

[TheSword]

There’s no right or wrong, just personal preference. There is a reason whisper rolls are a thing on every single VTT. Though my gosh lots of people get on their high horse about this perennial topic.

In D&D I don’t think it is necessary. We go off success or failure. I don’t ask to see every player’s roll. I just accept when they tell me they raised an 18. I don’t see why the DM should have to as well. If nothing else it would mean us sitting in a completely different setup up in the living room because I’m on a high table and the players sit on couches. My eyesight ain’t that good even though I’m higher up.

I also think knowing what a foe rolled and whether they was a success or failure can give the players information they wouldn’t have in the game and it can be played by experienced players. Saves for instance.

I also think there are tests where it better not to know what the foe scored… deception and stealth for instance. When it’s in VTT I usually have open roll but I’ll whisper those roles. Along with reinforcement rolls, random tables etc.

In short. There are more than enough exceptions for me to say it’s personal choice. If a player joined my group and demanded I roll in the open for philosophical reasons, I’d politely tell them where to go.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Fudging (as is usually used in a D&D context) is not possible in Fiasco because the dice that are there are used purely during character creation, and one die at the end of each roleplay scene is used to indicate whether the protagonist of the scene does or does not get what they want at the end of it. And there always always plenty of both types to hand to the player that indicates scene result so no one needs to "fudge" one way or the other.

But the fact there are no dice rolls to fudge or not fudge does not mean it is still not a roleplaying game.

I'm not familiar with Fiasco. Where's the "game" part?