The longer I've DMed the more I've moved to nearly always rolling in the open. I have 3 reasons:
1) I mainly play on Roll20 with the Beyond20 extension, and it's extra hassle to toggle between some open rolls and some hidden, so I just leave them all open.
2) It speeds things up when everyone can see the roll results rather than the extra time of me announcing every single result, especially when I don't have to bother memorizing every PC's AC and DC. It's pretty fast to just go: "DM: The creature swings both claws and tries to chomp on of the barbarian... click click click... Player 1: Bite missed me, but claws hit. I'm raging so it's only 6 damage."
3) It's honestly a lot more fun, and I highly recommend it. Getting a Nat 1 or 20 on a big roll is a ton more fun when all of us see that number appear together rather than seeing it by myself and then saying it. Secret rolls are lonely. ;)
On the very rare occasion, where the players aren't even aware of something roll-worthy happening, I will roll in secret. But that's really the only time now.
Personally, I make all my rolls as DM behind the screen. From keeping monster modifiers secret to adding an air of mystery and tension to the game, since they have to wait until I announce the result rather than just watch the dice, I think it brings about a better experience. Secret DM dice rolls are also my preference when I am a player as well.
There is one time I consistently tell my players what the dice say - if one of them imposed disadvantage in some way and one of the die is a Nat 20, I will let the players know they avoided a crit. It makes the person who imposed disadvantage feel happy to have saved themselves or a colleague from a nasty hit, without revealing any proprietary DM information.
This is a great point. One can use the rolls behind the screen to draw the players in and seize the opportunities in building the drama, the mystery, the anticipation of the reveal. A DM is part entertainer, after all. I might reference the widely known 'cupcake' scene as an incredibly epic example of this very thing.
Imagine how differently this scene could have played out if everyone simply watched the dice roll for the save and then responded accordingly. It certainly would have been satisfying to know a save was failed right away, but the scene I am citing was incredibly intense. Everyone was on the edge of their seat for a great deal longer than if they had simply been watching the DM roll.
90% of all rolls can and should be in the open. A good DM never cheats on the dice rolls. The only rolls that should be behind a screen are ones that deal with Perception, Insight, Deception, Stealth, and other skill rolls for NPC's AND PC's alike.
A PC should NEVER make a skill roll where failure can be an unknown, like Stealth, Perception, Insight etc. The DM should make those behind a screen so the player never knows if the PC was successful or unsuccessful in those specific conditions.
Other than that, rolls can be in the open. Further, in most cases, only the players nearest the DM can actually read the open rolls.
It does appear that yours is the minority position.
I haven't rolled behind a screen (other than for resolving hidden events) in years, because I find DM screens annoying and if I really want to cheat I have tons of other options. However, the reason I ask is being doing statistics from N=1 is... not the most accurate.
90% of all rolls can and should be in the open. A good DM never cheats on the dice rolls. The only rolls that should be behind a screen are ones that deal with Perception, Insight, Deception, Stealth, and other skill rolls for NPC's AND PC's alike.
A PC should NEVER make a skill roll where failure can be an unknown, like Stealth, Perception, Insight etc. The DM should make those behind a screen so the player never knows if the PC was successful or unsuccessful in those specific conditions.
Other than that, rolls can be in the open. Further, in most cases, only the players nearest the DM can actually read the open rolls.
It does appear that yours is the minority position.
It does not make me wrong.
So if a DM overestimates the strength of the party or underestimates that of the opponents he has chosen for them, the DM should just kill the party off?
The players control their own characters, subject to any restrictions placed by the DM's world around them. The DM controls literally everything else, every aspect of that world around them including the air they breath. Heck, not just one world, either, but everything, everyone (other than the PC's) in that reality. The DM cannot cheat. They literally have infinitely more powerful than the PC's.
Now ideally, they have predicted and written well and their die rolls can stand, but even then, any they do fudge? Not cheating. Their world.
That and rolling everything behind the screens increases dramatic tension. Especially when the party can hear a die roll and have no clue what it is for or what the result was... and even if it was just to roll a die to build dramatic tension :D
Your first premise about strength suggests the DM is supposed to build encounters that entertain the players, and have the PC's "just survive", which further implies that char death is not an option, if the players do everything right. I don't run games that way, because that was NEVER the intent of the game. Look at the random encounter charts in 1e, or 2e. The encounters could be trivial, or they could be deadly, Good players learned that sometimes running away was an intelligent tactic. Even when I scratch build encounters, some are designed to be brutal enough that with some unlucky rolls a PC can die. Others may be a cakewalk. But my players never expect me to save the PC's if things go bad.
And as for the dramatic tension, when I am at the table (I play at real tables, with us all gathered around it, with real dice) randomly rolling the dice I can do, but in my games, there is so much dice rolling, it is not really necessary. I did explain in my post what rolls should be behind a screen, and most certainly there are some. There is plenty of dramatic tension when I pull a Hill Giant mini, or 3 Ogre mini's, out of the case.
Adjusting rolls is cheating. Players are not allowed to do it. Neither should DM's.
Good DMs never fudge dice rolls. Good DMs sometimes fudge dice rolls. Great DMs know their players well enough to do what is the right answer for their party and are willing to adjust their playstyle at the drop of a pin to account for what makes the game fun for everyone at the table.
Absolutist rhetoric, like calling an DM fudging rolls to ensure their party has fun cheating or calling folks who like the brutality nihilists, are both silly positions to take. They are different, equally acceptable playstyles—D&D’s greatest strength has always been how open it is to different mechanisms for play.
Personally, I do both, sometimes within the same combat encounter. For example, I have one player who probably would suffer real world trauma if u killed her character due to her level of attachment - I’m not going to forego attacking her, because I still want there to be tension and the appearance of risk, but I don’t want to kill her due to bad luck alone because I’m not going to cause real trauma over a game. I have another player in that same campaign who I do not like to fudge against—she revels in the risk and would probably get a kick out of her character going down. Neither knows they are being treated any differently, and both are convinced the game is fatal and that I’m a sadist. This is another reason I like to roll privately - it lets me treat each player according to their individual need.
The important thing remains that you do what works for your table, and not disparage those who are doing something that works for them and theirs.
I am the DM in my group, and I roll behind the screen all the time. The only rolls that are in the open are player rolls, and the only player orlls which I ask them to keep to themselves are death saving throws, because the tension builds more if you don't know who is or is not dying.
The only rolls which might normally be behind the screen which I have rolled in the open is when there is a random table (happens a lot) and I will ask the player to roll for it.
I am also open with the rolls, depending on how much tension we need. If the game is tense, I will not divulge anything. If it's light, I might say "Well, I rolled a 2 so that's a 5 to hit, does that hit?" jokingly, and the players know it's a +3 to hit, so not that dangerous. Conversely I might roll and say "that's a 5, but it still might... does a 14 hit?" and they know this thing is hitting hard. If they were already taking it as a serious threat, I would not need to divulge this. Helps to keep characters acting realistically if the players understand what they're dealing with, so you don't get characters dying because they were taking things too lightly.
In the end, it was all about the rolls we made along the way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
So if a DM overestimates the strength of the party or underestimates that of the opponents he has chosen for them, the DM should just kill the party off?
What does that have to do with rolling behind a screen? It's entirely possible to fudge an encounter without fudging any die rolls.
I have to say, I am surprised by the way the obvious success skill checks are moving up. The others were expected from my PoV, but we are still looking at a "most" situation here.
I'd be willing to concede that it is most, at this point.
We need a larger sample size overall, of course, for any decent predictive array, and I would prefer to see a more standard "never, sometimes, always" basis for clarification.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I have a tendency when i DM in person to walk around as a i talk, gesture etc and often just roll a d20 wherever i am, usually on the player's table next to me, in which case the roll is public. ;)
Good DMs never fudge dice rolls. Good DMs sometimes fudge dice rolls. Great DMs know their players well enough to do what is the right answer for their party and are willing to adjust their playstyle at the drop of a pin to account for what makes the game fun for everyone at the table.
I agree, but this needs to be a crucial part of Session Zero. I don't want to play with a Dungeon Masters who fudges rolls, and it would ruin my experience a potentially friendship with whoever's running the game if they're fudging rolls and hiding that from me. Though I will say that it's important as a player to clarify this from the start, this likely is upsetting to tons of players - especially newish ones - that have zero idea it's a common occurrence in D&D.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Good DMs never fudge dice rolls. Good DMs sometimes fudge dice rolls. Great DMs know their players well enough to do what is the right answer for their party and are willing to adjust their playstyle at the drop of a pin to account for what makes the game fun for everyone at the table.
I agree, but this needs to be a crucial part of Session Zero. I don't want to play with a Dungeon Masters who fudges rolls, and it would ruin my experience a potentially friendship with whoever's running the game if they're fudging rolls and hiding that from me. Though I will say that it's important as a player to clarify this from the start, this likely is upsetting to tons of players - especially newish ones - that have zero idea it's a common occurrence in D&D.
You cannot deal with this in session zero. The second you say you are doing it, you’ve ruined the illusion and everyone’s enjoyment decreases. The reality is that no one wants to know they are playing with a DM who fudges numbers every now and then—but many people find the game more enjoyable when their DM is fudging. Keeping the illusion of honest rolls is the single most important part of fudging your rolls—if you get caught (or if you were foolish enough to out yourself, such as during a session zero), the game is up.
Frankly, if you have enjoyed playing D&D with an “honest DM who hides their dice” you probably have seen some fudging, never realised it, and never had your enjoyment decreased.
I guess I'll hop in here now and note that it depends on how a DM fudges dice.
A lot of folks are always concerned that a DM is "out to get them" and fundges rolls to hurt the characters and to make things much harder for them.
I would go so far as to argue that the big reason people have for disliking screened rolls is because they lack trust that the Dm isn't going to cheat.
And with reason -- I've known Dms who have a tendency to fudge against the characters.
However, most DM's I know of generally fudge rolls for only two reasons: to help the PCs, or to drive the story forward.
The second one is a big issue in a lot of cases, because often the Players simply wanted to do something, "it should have worked" but didn't, and they don't care if it advanced the story, even if they enjoy the story because they are upset about the thing not working.
That trust thing requires time and willingness to engender -- if you can't trust your DM, then you aren't going to have fun. NO matter what they do -- and that starts with something like rolling behind a screen. Most folks operate in good faith, don't care, but some people are not able to do that for assorted reasons. I have some DMs that I know that I will never play with because I don't trust them (not that it matters, since the most "player" I get is running an NPC in another Dm's game).
I've lost "new to our table" players over it, and I expect in the years to come I will lose more. I don't take it personally because I know I'm not fudging rolls to harm the characters. Although there are days when I really wish I would, lol. I've had entire sessions -- a hundred rolls -- where I never hit a darn thing with my baddies. They were making Star Wars Ep 1 storm troopers look accurate. THey were going down like Redshirts on an away team.
Conversely, I've had sessions where my dice were feeling murderous, and I've had to fudge a lot because that many crits can really ruin a Player's day.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Good DMs never fudge dice rolls. Good DMs sometimes fudge dice rolls. Great DMs know their players well enough to do what is the right answer for their party and are willing to adjust their playstyle at the drop of a pin to account for what makes the game fun for everyone at the table.
I agree, but this needs to be a crucial part of Session Zero. I don't want to play with a Dungeon Masters who fudges rolls, and it would ruin my experience a potentially friendship with whoever's running the game if they're fudging rolls and hiding that from me. Though I will say that it's important as a player to clarify this from the start, this likely is upsetting to tons of players - especially newish ones - that have zero idea it's a common occurrence in D&D.
You cannot deal with this in session zero. The second you say you are doing it, you’ve ruined the illusion and everyone’s enjoyment decreases. The reality is that no one wants to know they are playing with a DM who fudges numbers every now and then—but many people find the game more enjoyable when their DM is fudging. Keeping the illusion of honest rolls is the single most important part of fudging your rolls—if you get caught (or if you were foolish enough to out yourself, such as during a session zero), the game is up.
Frankly, if you have enjoyed playing D&D with an “honest DM who hides their dice” you probably have seen some fudging, never realised it, and never had your enjoyment decreased.
One of the most fundamental rules of the internet - never presume personal experience is universal.
Your players might not ever want to know. It may decrease your players' enjoyment. Don't presume everyone else feels the same.
You cannot deal with this in session zero. The second you say you are doing it, you’ve ruined the illusion and everyone’s enjoyment decreases.
You can absolutely deal with it, because the question isn't really about fudging, it's a more general question about whether the PCs have plot protection.
I have my next session in a couple days. The group needs to find a secret door to proceed in this dungeon crawl (yes,. I am aware of the danger of putting such a thing behind a secret door). Now, the group may find a way that I have not thought of. That is entirely possible given all the casters in the group.
Every roll last session was in front of the players, as it was straight-foward combat for me as a DM. If put one char into death saves. If I rolled a crit along the way, that char may have died. So be it. That is how the dice roll, and no one can complain when the rolls can be seen.
But this upcoming session, if and when the players' PC's start making Perception for that secret door and/or Stealth rolls, I WILL be making those rolls for the players, and behind a screen. There is zero chance I am going to let the player that the PC rolled brilliantly or poorly. The PC does not know if it is Stealthy or not. And the players will pile on with Perception and Investigation rolls if they know a PC failed badly on a roll.
I have my next session in a couple days. The group needs to find a secret door to proceed in this dungeon crawl (yes,. I am aware of the danger of putting such a thing behind a secret door). Now, the group may find a way that I have not thought of. That is entirely possible given all the casters in the group.
Every roll last session was in front of the players, as it was straight-foward combat for me as a DM. If put one char into death saves. If I rolled a crit along the way, that char may have died. So be it. That is how the dice roll, and no one can complain when the rolls can be seen.
But this upcoming session, if and when the players' PC's start making Perception for that secret door and/or Stealth rolls, I WILL be making those rolls for the players, and behind a screen. There is zero chance I am going to let the player that the PC rolled brilliantly or poorly. The PC does not know if it is Stealthy or not. And the players will pile on with Perception and Investigation rolls if they know a PC failed badly on a roll.
Passive perception, insight and investigation are specifically designed to deal with a DM’s “need” to roll anything for their players. The DM controls the entire world except the characters. What difference does it make if the players know the result of their stealth roll? They have no idea how perceptive the environment is. A 5 may be more than enough if the NPC they are sneaking around is deaf but could be catastrophic under other circumstances. Either way, they’ve committed to the sneaking and rolled the 5. It is the player’s job to roll for their character. It is your job as the DM to tell them the result of the roll.
As a player, no way am I agreeing to the DM rolling anything for my character. Especially when there are mechanics in place to ameliorate that “need”. Talk about robbing players of agency. Their luck has no effect on their character’s fate. Might as well play with yourself if you’re a DM making rolls for the characters >.>
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The longer I've DMed the more I've moved to nearly always rolling in the open. I have 3 reasons:
1) I mainly play on Roll20 with the Beyond20 extension, and it's extra hassle to toggle between some open rolls and some hidden, so I just leave them all open.
2) It speeds things up when everyone can see the roll results rather than the extra time of me announcing every single result, especially when I don't have to bother memorizing every PC's AC and DC. It's pretty fast to just go: "DM: The creature swings both claws and tries to chomp on of the barbarian... click click click... Player 1: Bite missed me, but claws hit. I'm raging so it's only 6 damage."
3) It's honestly a lot more fun, and I highly recommend it. Getting a Nat 1 or 20 on a big roll is a ton more fun when all of us see that number appear together rather than seeing it by myself and then saying it. Secret rolls are lonely. ;)
On the very rare occasion, where the players aren't even aware of something roll-worthy happening, I will roll in secret. But that's really the only time now.
This is a great point. One can use the rolls behind the screen to draw the players in and seize the opportunities in building the drama, the mystery, the anticipation of the reveal. A DM is part entertainer, after all. I might reference the widely known 'cupcake' scene as an incredibly epic example of this very thing.
Imagine how differently this scene could have played out if everyone simply watched the dice roll for the save and then responded accordingly. It certainly would have been satisfying to know a save was failed right away, but the scene I am citing was incredibly intense. Everyone was on the edge of their seat for a great deal longer than if they had simply been watching the DM roll.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
It does not make me wrong.
I haven't rolled behind a screen (other than for resolving hidden events) in years, because I find DM screens annoying and if I really want to cheat I have tons of other options. However, the reason I ask is being doing statistics from N=1 is... not the most accurate.
I'm confused. You give us a 1 to 5 scale and then say "worst=never".
What the heck does that mean?
Does 1 mean never or does 5 mean never?
And why is never the worst?
You're implying that a bad DM is someone who rolls all their rolls out in the open.
So it sounds like a rather biased premise.
Anzio Faro. Protector Aasimar light cleric. Lvl 18.
Viktor Gavriil. White dragonborn grave cleric. Lvl 20.
Ikram Sahir ibn-Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad. Brass dragonborn draconic sorcerer Lvl 9. Fire elemental devil.
Wrangler of cats.
Your first premise about strength suggests the DM is supposed to build encounters that entertain the players, and have the PC's "just survive", which further implies that char death is not an option, if the players do everything right. I don't run games that way, because that was NEVER the intent of the game. Look at the random encounter charts in 1e, or 2e. The encounters could be trivial, or they could be deadly, Good players learned that sometimes running away was an intelligent tactic. Even when I scratch build encounters, some are designed to be brutal enough that with some unlucky rolls a PC can die. Others may be a cakewalk. But my players never expect me to save the PC's if things go bad.
And as for the dramatic tension, when I am at the table (I play at real tables, with us all gathered around it, with real dice) randomly rolling the dice I can do, but in my games, there is so much dice rolling, it is not really necessary. I did explain in my post what rolls should be behind a screen, and most certainly there are some. There is plenty of dramatic tension when I pull a Hill Giant mini, or 3 Ogre mini's, out of the case.
Adjusting rolls is cheating. Players are not allowed to do it. Neither should DM's.
Good DMs never fudge dice rolls. Good DMs sometimes fudge dice rolls. Great DMs know their players well enough to do what is the right answer for their party and are willing to adjust their playstyle at the drop of a pin to account for what makes the game fun for everyone at the table.
Absolutist rhetoric, like calling an DM fudging rolls to ensure their party has fun cheating or calling folks who like the brutality nihilists, are both silly positions to take. They are different, equally acceptable playstyles—D&D’s greatest strength has always been how open it is to different mechanisms for play.
Personally, I do both, sometimes within the same combat encounter. For example, I have one player who probably would suffer real world trauma if u killed her character due to her level of attachment - I’m not going to forego attacking her, because I still want there to be tension and the appearance of risk, but I don’t want to kill her due to bad luck alone because I’m not going to cause real trauma over a game. I have another player in that same campaign who I do not like to fudge against—she revels in the risk and would probably get a kick out of her character going down. Neither knows they are being treated any differently, and both are convinced the game is fatal and that I’m a sadist. This is another reason I like to roll privately - it lets me treat each player according to their individual need.
The important thing remains that you do what works for your table, and not disparage those who are doing something that works for them and theirs.
The the vast majority of games i DM or play in rolling in private or public occur differently depending wether playing online or in person.
Online: Usually rolls are public.
In person: Usually behind DM screen.
I am the DM in my group, and I roll behind the screen all the time. The only rolls that are in the open are player rolls, and the only player orlls which I ask them to keep to themselves are death saving throws, because the tension builds more if you don't know who is or is not dying.
The only rolls which might normally be behind the screen which I have rolled in the open is when there is a random table (happens a lot) and I will ask the player to roll for it.
I am also open with the rolls, depending on how much tension we need. If the game is tense, I will not divulge anything. If it's light, I might say "Well, I rolled a 2 so that's a 5 to hit, does that hit?" jokingly, and the players know it's a +3 to hit, so not that dangerous. Conversely I might roll and say "that's a 5, but it still might... does a 14 hit?" and they know this thing is hitting hard. If they were already taking it as a serious threat, I would not need to divulge this. Helps to keep characters acting realistically if the players understand what they're dealing with, so you don't get characters dying because they were taking things too lightly.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
In the end, it was all about the rolls we made along the way.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
What does that have to do with rolling behind a screen? It's entirely possible to fudge an encounter without fudging any die rolls.
I have to say, I am surprised by the way the obvious success skill checks are moving up. The others were expected from my PoV, but we are still looking at a "most" situation here.
I'd be willing to concede that it is most, at this point.
We need a larger sample size overall, of course, for any decent predictive array, and I would prefer to see a more standard "never, sometimes, always" basis for clarification.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I have a tendency when i DM in person to walk around as a i talk, gesture etc and often just roll a d20 wherever i am, usually on the player's table next to me, in which case the roll is public. ;)
I agree, but this needs to be a crucial part of Session Zero. I don't want to play with a Dungeon Masters who fudges rolls, and it would ruin my experience a potentially friendship with whoever's running the game if they're fudging rolls and hiding that from me. Though I will say that it's important as a player to clarify this from the start, this likely is upsetting to tons of players - especially newish ones - that have zero idea it's a common occurrence in D&D.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.You cannot deal with this in session zero. The second you say you are doing it, you’ve ruined the illusion and everyone’s enjoyment decreases. The reality is that no one wants to know they are playing with a DM who fudges numbers every now and then—but many people find the game more enjoyable when their DM is fudging. Keeping the illusion of honest rolls is the single most important part of fudging your rolls—if you get caught (or if you were foolish enough to out yourself, such as during a session zero), the game is up.
Frankly, if you have enjoyed playing D&D with an “honest DM who hides their dice” you probably have seen some fudging, never realised it, and never had your enjoyment decreased.
I guess I'll hop in here now and note that it depends on how a DM fudges dice.
A lot of folks are always concerned that a DM is "out to get them" and fundges rolls to hurt the characters and to make things much harder for them.
I would go so far as to argue that the big reason people have for disliking screened rolls is because they lack trust that the Dm isn't going to cheat.
And with reason -- I've known Dms who have a tendency to fudge against the characters.
However, most DM's I know of generally fudge rolls for only two reasons: to help the PCs, or to drive the story forward.
The second one is a big issue in a lot of cases, because often the Players simply wanted to do something, "it should have worked" but didn't, and they don't care if it advanced the story, even if they enjoy the story because they are upset about the thing not working.
That trust thing requires time and willingness to engender -- if you can't trust your DM, then you aren't going to have fun. NO matter what they do -- and that starts with something like rolling behind a screen. Most folks operate in good faith, don't care, but some people are not able to do that for assorted reasons. I have some DMs that I know that I will never play with because I don't trust them (not that it matters, since the most "player" I get is running an NPC in another Dm's game).
I've lost "new to our table" players over it, and I expect in the years to come I will lose more. I don't take it personally because I know I'm not fudging rolls to harm the characters. Although there are days when I really wish I would, lol. I've had entire sessions -- a hundred rolls -- where I never hit a darn thing with my baddies. They were making Star Wars Ep 1 storm troopers look accurate. THey were going down like Redshirts on an away team.
Conversely, I've had sessions where my dice were feeling murderous, and I've had to fudge a lot because that many crits can really ruin a Player's day.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
One of the most fundamental rules of the internet - never presume personal experience is universal.
Your players might not ever want to know. It may decrease your players' enjoyment. Don't presume everyone else feels the same.
You can absolutely deal with it, because the question isn't really about fudging, it's a more general question about whether the PCs have plot protection.
I have my next session in a couple days. The group needs to find a secret door to proceed in this dungeon crawl (yes,. I am aware of the danger of putting such a thing behind a secret door). Now, the group may find a way that I have not thought of. That is entirely possible given all the casters in the group.
Every roll last session was in front of the players, as it was straight-foward combat for me as a DM. If put one char into death saves. If I rolled a crit along the way, that char may have died. So be it. That is how the dice roll, and no one can complain when the rolls can be seen.
But this upcoming session, if and when the players' PC's start making Perception for that secret door and/or Stealth rolls, I WILL be making those rolls for the players, and behind a screen. There is zero chance I am going to let the player that the PC rolled brilliantly or poorly. The PC does not know if it is Stealthy or not. And the players will pile on with Perception and Investigation rolls if they know a PC failed badly on a roll.
Passive perception, insight and investigation are specifically designed to deal with a DM’s “need” to roll anything for their players. The DM controls the entire world except the characters. What difference does it make if the players know the result of their stealth roll? They have no idea how perceptive the environment is. A 5 may be more than enough if the NPC they are sneaking around is deaf but could be catastrophic under other circumstances. Either way, they’ve committed to the sneaking and rolled the 5. It is the player’s job to roll for their character. It is your job as the DM to tell them the result of the roll.
As a player, no way am I agreeing to the DM rolling anything for my character. Especially when there are mechanics in place to ameliorate that “need”. Talk about robbing players of agency. Their luck has no effect on their character’s fate. Might as well play with yourself if you’re a DM making rolls for the characters >.>