So im trying to decide how i want to run the dice rolling in the game we are going to start soon.
I posted a thread about this awhile back (got deleted) but ive had new thoughts i thought id bring up and see what you all think about it.
So in the last thread (it seems to have disappeared) a player mentioned using DMGenie to do all the rolls and the players pretty much did none of them.
Now there are some things about this i REALLY like and some i dont so ill explain.
I think rolling the dice really gives you a feel of "input" into the game and that you have control over your own character. If i am sitting there as DM and saying "you fail, you succeed, etc, etc" then it drops down on player participation.
On the flip side, i would love to run a game which minimises the meta side of the game, and moves the rules to the bakcground for the DM to mostly deal with, while the "scene/reality" of the situation comes to the front.
So i could say: "ok you deal X dmg, so you swing your sword in an upwards arc which your opponent fails to block. The sword smashes into his chestplate driving him backwards and you notice a trickle of blood leak down the pelvic armour..."
or i could say the same thing without putting in the numbers. Keeps the players from thinking "ok he has Y hps left so if i hit him with this then he'll go down quickest coz he cant have more than X hps".
I love the idea of them asking "what does he look like? is he stumbling? can i see any blood? etc etc" actually getting more into the "scene" and explaining the lay of things, rather than concentrating on the mechanics.
So anyway im once again unsure how to run my game.
A great quote from Man in the Funny Hat in that last thread (which is now gone but i saved in Gmail)
I really like this, it makes it simple in terms of giving the players input while giving the DM the tools he needs, but still im thinking of trying to hide the mechanics more, less focus on the numbers and more on the imagination side?
Maybe letting them make their attack rolls and rolling dmg for them would solve this? They see if their attack hits, but thne how much they do dmg depends on what their characters see
Anyway what are ppls thoughts on this?

M
I posted a thread about this awhile back (got deleted) but ive had new thoughts i thought id bring up and see what you all think about it.
So in the last thread (it seems to have disappeared) a player mentioned using DMGenie to do all the rolls and the players pretty much did none of them.
Now there are some things about this i REALLY like and some i dont so ill explain.
I think rolling the dice really gives you a feel of "input" into the game and that you have control over your own character. If i am sitting there as DM and saying "you fail, you succeed, etc, etc" then it drops down on player participation.
On the flip side, i would love to run a game which minimises the meta side of the game, and moves the rules to the bakcground for the DM to mostly deal with, while the "scene/reality" of the situation comes to the front.
So i could say: "ok you deal X dmg, so you swing your sword in an upwards arc which your opponent fails to block. The sword smashes into his chestplate driving him backwards and you notice a trickle of blood leak down the pelvic armour..."
or i could say the same thing without putting in the numbers. Keeps the players from thinking "ok he has Y hps left so if i hit him with this then he'll go down quickest coz he cant have more than X hps".
I love the idea of them asking "what does he look like? is he stumbling? can i see any blood? etc etc" actually getting more into the "scene" and explaining the lay of things, rather than concentrating on the mechanics.
So anyway im once again unsure how to run my game.
A great quote from Man in the Funny Hat in that last thread (which is now gone but i saved in Gmail)
Man In The Funny Hat said:Players make all rolls for their characters actions, so all their PC's attack, damage, saves, skill rolls, etc. About the only time you wouldn't have them do so is when making such a roll WOULD be a meta-game clue of what should otherwise be unknown to them. Then it becomes a DM choice as to whether the player makes the roll or the DM makes the roll for them. This is a useful tool for a DM to use. If you make a spot check FOR the PC then whatever there is to be spotted remains a secret. If you TELL the player to make a spot check you remind the player to pay closer attention, you give meta-game clues that can equate to the PC's having the sensation that SOMETHING is wrong, but they don't know what - you make them paranoid.
I really like this, it makes it simple in terms of giving the players input while giving the DM the tools he needs, but still im thinking of trying to hide the mechanics more, less focus on the numbers and more on the imagination side?
Maybe letting them make their attack rolls and rolling dmg for them would solve this? They see if their attack hits, but thne how much they do dmg depends on what their characters see
Anyway what are ppls thoughts on this?

M