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

[Thomas Shey]

That assumption is unproven, and at the least, unwise.

To be really blunt: and? Its not like that isn't true of a lot of habits cultures develop.

To be blunt back, if a string of rolls creates a circumstance where an entire group, who has access to incredible feats, powers, and an abundance of game mechanics that prevent them from dying are killed off, you didn't do your work as a DM. (You as in a DM, not you personally.) Could one PC die. Sure. If that is unpalatable, then once again, you didn't discuss it during session zero like you were supposed to as a DM. So as DM, you didn't do your work you were supposed to.

I think you're underestimating the degree to which people don't plan for low-frequency events, but still don't like them.

 

[GMMichael]

If the GM decided in their prep that Suspect B is the murderer, and I figure this out in play, I feel like I have achieved something.
If the GM decided in their prep that Suspect B is the murderer, and I guess C, but the GM decides that C makes the better story or it's easier to finish the session now, and so changes it to C, I have been pandered to and my achievement is hollow. The goalposts have moved.

If I were your GM, you'd feel like you achieved something either way, because you'd never know that the goalposts moved.

This doesn't quite tie directly to fudging dice though, because a bad dice fudger (who doesn't roll in the open) can nonverbally convey that there's some fudging going on, especially if it happens repeatedly. Fortunately for the murder mystery GM, PCs probably aren't guessing who the murderer is at the frequency that they're making (contested?) die rolls.

Die rolls being effectively random, there will be those times when the GM gets a string of high rolls, pummeling the PCs to bits. Rolling in the open at that point is a nice gesture, to show that PC-pummeling is the will of the dice, but unless it's endemic, I wouldn't start making calls to pull back the curtain as a PC.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

There's truth here. A GM's job, amongst other things, is deciding what happened. If you know what happened, you don't need a die roll for it. But there is the case in which a GM isn't really sure, and going through the motions dictated by the rules makes it more clear. Which often results in a "fudge." As MCDM points out, lying to the players is the GM's job, and in this case, the lie is, "the rules will do the deciding here."

Honest question: if the “GM isn’t really sure” and then decides to roll the dice to let the dice determine the outcome but then “fudges” b/c the result doesn’t please them…. Doesn’t that really mean they were sure?

 

[Shadowdweller00]

But yeah, I LOVE the implication that I’m a cheater or some kind of degenerate DM because I don’t roll in the open or that I’m not doctrinaire about rolled results.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but I personally DO NOT consider you to be any kind of "cheater" for not rolling in the open. Or even fudging if you do so*. I just happen to believe that rolling in the open (and not fudging) leads to better outcomes.

Or at least any worse type of cheater than any other DM. Because I absolutely still do cheat...just in different ways. That I try very hard to make sure do not adversely effect player agency, experience , or accomplishment.

* EDIT: Well, in some cases at least. Fudging CAN actually be cheating when used badly.

 

[Lanefan]

I never said their roles or motivations are the same. But the GM that rolls behind the screen is still doing the exact same thing as the player who does. Using the words "desirable" or "undesirable" to try and piecemeal a difference is silly. An "undesirable" outcome specifically implies there is a "desirable" outcome. Therefore, the GM is doing it for the same reason - to curate the experience how they wish it to go.
People overthink this way too much. You either are fudging the die rolls or not. Trying to explain it off with roles in the game, motivations, etc. is ridiculous. You either want fudging or don't.

I don't want fudging, either as player or DM, but I still roll in secret as DM (with rare moment-of-climax exceptions) and sometimes roll in secret (other than to the DM) as a player.

Why?

Because I want to preserve a sense of mystery and uncertainty, however faint it might be.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Why?

Because I want to preserve a sense of mystery and uncertainty, however faint it might be.

I suspect that most of us who prefer to roll in the open when possible still hide SOME of our rolls. Such as when enemies are trying to sneak up on the party...

 

[Lanefan]

Actually, I think that still can be about trust. The whole point is that even positive fudging can be misaimed even if its well meaning.

At the end of the day, have faith in your dice or don't roll them. If you conclude you've made a significant mistake in how you've set up difficulty in either direction, whether in combat or not, just tell people and fix it. Be honest about it.

Or - and this is my preference - just neutrally let it play out to whatever possibly-disastrous conclusion it may. If you've made it too hard, IME adventuring parties are incredibly resilient things (individual characters maybe not so much) and thus a TPK is very unlikely; while if you've made it too easy then let 'em have their curb-stompin' moment and carry on.

 

[Lanefan]

That assumption is unproven, and at the least, unwise. The player really wanting to look the part of the hero while running a gauntlet with excessively hard skill checks, all to impress the significant other they adore in character isn't fudging the acrobatics check just for self-interest. They are doing it for the overall health of the game - to be able to play their character with their own agency. I mean, this is especially true if they know the "love connection" will be negated if they failed.

Sorry, but that example almost screams "in the player's self-interest" to me.

 

[Lanefan]

I suspect that most of us who prefer to roll in the open when possible still hide SOME of our rolls. Such as when enemies are trying to sneak up on the party...

Doesn't the very act of you suddenly rolling in secret give it away to the players, though, that something's going on and their characters need to be on their guard more than they otherwise might be?

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Doesn't the very act of you suddenly rolling in secret give it away to the players, though, that something's going on and their characters need to be on their guard more than they otherwise might be?

Possibly. I roll for a number of other reasons without telling the players though - random events or encounters, random story elements such as weather, sometimes environmental details that the PCs may or may not notice, sometimes just because I'm a fidgety person who rolls dice for the hell of it while concentrating on something else. So the fact of my rolling dice doesn't necessarily give away an ambush per se.

I'm mostly careful to roll out in the open during combat.