THIS is why I roll in the open...

[Crothian]

I always roll behind the screen. Not because I fudge dice, but I use misdirection. I sometimes roll for no reason to make the players paraniod. That dopesn't work as well when they can se the die rolls.

 

[Rel]

I always roll behind the screen. Not because I fudge dice, but I use misdirection. I sometimes roll for no reason to make the players paraniod. That dopesn't work as well when they can se the die rolls.

What do you mean? I do this and when I roll very high or very low then the players always look exceptionally terrified.

 

[DragonLancer]

I was just giving you a hard time for sounding a bit authoritative.

I promise not to be a muppet in the future. But if I am then I am SO being Animal!

Heh. Can you play the drums as well as Animal?

Sorry if I do sound authoritative, sometimes the internet does to my posts.
I admit that there are times (especially on ENW) where I do read a post or thread and seriously question how some folks play their games, but I try not to force my views where unnessecary.

 

[Crothian]

What do you mean? I do this and when I roll very high or very low then the players always look exceptionally terrified.

because it doesn't matter what the die roll is, they just know it is being rolled. If they can see the die roll, then they take comfort with knowing what the roll is.

 

[Roadkill101]

I roll open. I used to roll behind a screen but found that the screen got in the way of reading the players rolls (I've run across a fair number of cheaters over the years), especially among larger groups.

I'm not too worried about players trying to figure out my rolls, because like a few others have already mentioned, sometimes my rolls are meaningless, therefore the players usually have no idea what I'm even rolling about.

 

[nimisgod]

I don't use a GM's screen since I'm a bit on the short side, height-wise. So I became used to rolling in the open (except for GM only rolls like sense motives and such).

I've tried using a screen and/or hiding my rolls constantly, but there's something special in letting your players see your rolls. That and using a screen inhibits my full range of gesture movement when RPing an NPC.

As a player, I don't really mind whichever method the GM uses, so long as he does the job well and I'm entertained.

 

[joshwitz]

I don't just have all combat rolls in the open. I go a step further: I have the players roll the monster attack rolls.

Years ago, I found that I had a hard time killing characters that I liked, and would regularly fudge the rolls. I'm just not cut out as an evil DM-type; I want the players to suceed. Then I read a Dragon Magazine article about having the players "defend themselves". I found that letting the dice "fall where they will" increases the tension in difficult combats, and takes away any temptation I might have to fudge the roll.

Monster saves, skill checks, random encounters are still behind the screen, however.

 

[Henry]

I promise not to be a muppet in the future. But if I am then I am SO being Animal!

Well, you do mumble a bit like the Swedish Chef when your players throw you a curveball...

 

[D-rock]

I don't roll in the open because it will let the players figure out too many things in a metagame sense. That and the fact I don't like reaching half way across the table so everybody can see what the roll is.

 

[D+1]

The rub lies here: If I was rolling behind the screen then I would probably have been more tempted to fudge for the Rogue/Cleric who is somewhat more integral to my plot than I would have for the Barbarian who was a more casually played PC. Thankfully I roll in the open, with big dice, and everyone can see that I'm not fudging for anybody. I enjoy that this takes some of the pressure off of me to be impartial and I also think it heightens the tension for the players to be riveted to the results of my giant dice as they tumble out whatever fate has in store.

That is indeed the rub. It can be both good and bad. How much of which depends on what you want from the game and what the players are willing to accept.

When you roll in the open there can be no question that the roll itself is fair. But are the bonuses you add or penalties you apply to it equally fair at all times? You don't place those out in the open for public scrutiny by players do you? When you decide whom the monsters will attack and WHY - is it fair and always impartial? When you roll in the open there is quickly no question of just what the total bonues/penalties ARE, which prevents maintaining the mystery of just how tough/weak an opponent is. When you roll in the open you can't "cheat" against the players - but then neither can you "cheat" in their FAVOR. That removes a highly useful tool of mitigating encounters that you may have under-estimated. (TPK's are not always the fault of the players or the randomness of the dice - sometimes it's the DM's fault.)

See, I'm personally of the opinion that if I have to choose between the almost certain death of character A or character B, I DON'T have to be fair and impartial. I CAN choose character A simply because I know the player won't be back again next week or because character B's death will have a much more problematic impact on the flow of the campaign. My impartiality and fairness comes out of not SEEKING to kill any given PC without bloody good reason for doing so. (Of course, I prefer to avoid overreliance upon any one character this way). As DM I am the arbiter within the game, but I am NOT utterly impartial. In fact, it is my firm belief that...

A) there ISN'T a DM anywhere who is truly impartial. We all have biases - and not all biases are BAD THINGS.
B) anyone who claims to be unbiased is lying to cover up, or hasn't really come to grips with the notion in the first place.
C) IME at least, "impartiality" and rolling in the open is very often (though not always...) just an easy cop-out for not making any difficult decisions: decisions that naturally carry the mere POSSIBILITY of being disliked by someone, but nonetheless ultimately will make for the best, most enjoyable experience for everyone at the table. The dice don't run the game - the DM does.
D) if the DM cannot be trusted to be impartial there's deeper problems that need to be addressed.
E) impartiality in rolling openly is really an illusion, a diversionary tactic. Just because you roll the die openly doesn't mean you can't cheat the modifiers, choose whom to attack, choose which attack forms will be used, choose WHEN to attack at all, choose what monsters appear and how many, etc. The DM has at all times and in all ways the ability to kill the PC's.

After everything is said and done, if you WANT to roll in the open and the players are okay with that then the rest is irrelevant. Rolling openly isn't inherently BAD. But I still think it's a net loss rather than a net benefit to anyone. Rolling openly should be reserved for those times when the DM is actively, deliberately and openly dissasociating himself from the results. E.g., I do it when a player has persisted in doing something really stupid despite multiple warnings, or perhaps instead is doing something inane and pointless. I then roll openly to emphasize the inevetability of the results - to graphically demonstrate just precisely how many dice of damage are being rolled, or that regardless of how low or high the to-hit roll that an attack WILL hit/miss, etc.

YMMV