who makes the checks?

[Alzrius]

Im not sure if this is adjudicated in any of the books (it probably is and I just missed it), but I wanted to ask what various DMs do for this.

When the PCs are in a situation where they would need to make a check to detect something unknown, does the DM tell the players to make the relevant check, indicating that there is a chance their characters would notice anyway, or does he not say, and the players make the checks whenever they desire, indicating when their character is trying to detect something? I ask because if the PCs all fail their Spot checks (or whatever) then the players are still sort of tipped off that something there is worth noting.

 

[LordAO]

It all depends upon the DM. It is more realistic for the DM to roll these kinds of checks himself. It is a natural tendency of players to assume that if a DM asks for a perception roll, there is something to look for. If they roll really good the'yll feel confident that they have found everything that there is to find. If they roll bad they will often start saying things like "I look more closely" and such. If the DM rolls and simply tells the players what they find, they won't be able to do these kinds of things for the wrong reasons. It's just a good practice to avoid metagame thinking. But it all depends on you. If you feel the players are mature enough to handle it, then let them roll. But I highly recommend that the DM do it secretly.

 

[Li Shenron]

I almost always roll these Listen and Spot checks by myself, and I don't tell the players that I was rolling such a check. And usually I roll once for all the party (using their best modifier), unless it is important to know who has succeeded and who not.

For example, to notice a noise in the next room (not actively putting the ear to the door) or coming from a side corridor, I roll secretely one single check for all the party: it is enough for 1 PC to hear the sound, he will surely inform the rest of the party. An exception may be if there is an NPC in the party, who may require his own separate roll (it's not obvious he intends to inform the others, maybe he's a traitor).
If a PC later puts the ear against the door to actively try to better get which sound it was, he declares the will to do another Listen check. Still I usually hide the result.

A typical situation when instead I let them roll for themselves (one roll each PC) is the ambush: I have already decided that the foes are attacking, there's no need to keep the result secret - next second the battle starts - and the check is needed only to decide who gets to act in the surprise round and who not.

I hope this was useful

 

[Drawmack]

I allow my players to roll their checks. I do this because we are playing a high intrigue/low battle game and gamers like to roll dice. I avoid the metagaming with a few simple rules.

1) If I tell them to roll something they can't say something like, ''I look more closely'' because the character didn't ''look'' in the first place.

2) Take 10 or 20 can only be stated before I tell them to roll or they state that they are rolling.

3) Obvious mategaming will let you find something, but you probably didn't want to find that anyway. Like a cleaver trap that removes your arm.

4) I have the right to disallow any check that is obviously based on metagaming.

 

[hammymchamham]

I let them roll. And if they roll bad and say "I look more closely" I might let them but it depends on if I want them to find something. Otherwise, even if they "look more closely" they'll still fail, even if they beat the DC.

 

[0-hr]

One of the signs of a good player is that they will not alter their actions based on such a die roll. If they leave the room regardless of whether their search was a 20 or a 1, then they have risen above metagaming. If your players are not yet that skilled, then you should roll their dice for them.

 

[Petrosian]

First off, as one of my PC stat sheets, i have a "compares to spot" column for the various skills the PC has that i might need him to roll. like say spellcraft. For example, if his spot is a net +7 and his wilderness lore is a net +4, the compares to spot column for Wl is "-3." I include saves in this column as well. This is handy for things like sense motive and bluff as well.

This way, whenever i want a secret die roll, i just ask for a spot check and adjust what they report to me to give me the correct info.

I tend to ask frequently for spot checks, especially on entering the room, to gauge how much info i give "at first glance." As such, my players are not usually that jumpy when i ask for spot checks.

 

[kreynolds]

I don't roll for anyone, not even healing potions. I just ask for d20's when something is coming up, and I referrence my cheat sheet with their statblocks to total up their bonus. So, they roll, I do the rest.

 

[Li Shenron]

I don't roll for anyone, not even healing potions. I just ask for d20's when something is coming up, and I referrence my cheat sheet with their statblocks to total up their bonus. So, they roll, I do the rest.

I used to do the same, but it usually provoked some zealous player to stay in place until he was able to get what check I had made (99% Spot or Listen).

BTW, I don't roll either for potions, why should I? When they drink it, they're going to find out the results

 

[kreynolds]

I used to do the same, but it usually provoked some zealous player to stay in place until he was able to get what check I had made (99% Spot or Listen).

Well, if it's for a Spot or Listen check because the floor is about to fall out form underneath them, then by all means, they can just stand there if they like.

Seriously though, I don't suffer these kinds of problems with my players. Not a one of us is under 25 (and we do try to act our age...most of the time ).