ok so still being newto d&d and dming i'm unsure as to how a dm should roll like should all my rolls be behind the screen or should npc,monster and dm pc rolls be done in view of my players and am i right in saying a dm roll for say deciding how a story point will play out ie player asks npc "are you telling the truth(npc is lying)" roll is lets say nat20 "ok i'm lying and heres why(massive plot here)" would be behind the screen
My rule is that things that players do not see or know about is rolled secretly.
I also do not roll for things which don't need to be rolled for. Rolling is for times when the element of chance is involved.
In your example, if a player checks to see if an NPC is lying, the player would have to roll against a DC of 20 minus their Charisma modifier (this is a call on my part, not a rule), and success would tell them that the NPC is lying -- but not what they lied about it.
As a DM, I wouldn't roll at all.
My rolls are not always behind the screen. Sometimes I will roll openly (mostly because it creates a different kind of vibe in the moment), but I do mostly roll secretly, and inpart because sometimes I just roll dice for no reason other than the theatricality of it.
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
My rule is that things that players do not see or know about is rolled secretly.
I also do not roll for things which don't need to be rolled for. Rolling is for times when the element of chance is involved.
In your example, if a player checks to see if an NPC is lying, the player would have to roll against a DC of 20 minus their Charisma modifier (this is a call on my part, not a rule), and success would tell them that the NPC is lying -- but not what they lied about it.
As a DM, I wouldn't roll at all.
My rolls are not always behind the screen. Sometimes I will roll openly (mostly because it creates a different kind of vibe in the moment), but I do mostly roll secretly, and inpart because sometimes I just roll dice for no reason other than the theatricality of it.
i guess too i'd sometimes roll a dice to decide how i want an npc to react i.e fail = angry success = forgiving
I like the idea that players neednt know why i roll lol
Would my initive attack roles be better in plain site to show i run a fair fight?
When you're DMing then you run the game the way you believe is best. No pressure, but it's all on you.
As for my advice, I think for something along the lines of a NPC's deception check it should be hidden from the players. If the players see you roll a five and then you tell them "you believe the NPC is lying" and the next time you roll a 19 and you tell them "you believe the NPC is telling the truth" then they know the deception check was successful so won't trust the NPC.
For combat it's doesn't make that much difference. It is nice that they know you're not fudging. But if they see you roll a 15 and then you say "Ok, that's a 30 to hit..." they're going to instantly know how tough the NPC they're fighting is.
ok so still being newto d&d and dming i'm unsure as to how a dm should roll like should all my rolls be behind the screen or should npc,monster and dm pc rolls be done in view of my players and am i right in saying a dm roll for say deciding how a story point will play out ie player asks npc "are you telling the truth(npc is lying)" roll is lets say nat20 "ok i'm lying and heres why(massive plot here)" would be behind the screen
Establish expectations about rolling dice. Rolling in full view of everyone is a good starting point. If you see a player rolling and scooping the dice up before anyone else can see, encourage that player to be less secretive.
When a die falls on the floor, do you count it or reroll it? When it lands cocked against a book, do you pull the book away and see where it lands, or reroll it?
What about you, the DM? Do you make your rolls in the open or hide them behind a DM screen? Consider the following:
If you roll dice where the players can see, they know you’re playing impartially and not fudging rolls.
Rolling behind a screen keeps the players guessing about the strength of their opposition. When a monster hits all the time, is it of a much higher level than the characters, or are you rolling high numbers?
Rolling behind a screen lets you fudge the results if you want to. If two critical hits in a row would kill a character, you could change the second critical hit into a normal hit, or even a miss. Don’t distort die rolls too often, though, and don’t let on that you’re doing it. Otherwise, your players might think they don’t face any real risks — or worse, that you’re playing favorites.
A roll behind a screen can help preserve mystery. For example, if a player thinks there might be someone invisible nearby and makes a Wisdom (Perception) check, consider rolling a die behind the screen even if no one is there, making the player think someone is, indeed, hiding. Try not to overuse this trick.
You might choose to make a roll for a player because you don’t want the player to know how good the check total is. For example, if a player suspects a baroness might be charmed and wants to make a Wisdom (Insight) check, you could make the roll in secret for the player. If the player rolled and got a high number but didn’t sense anything amiss, the player would be confident that the baroness wasn’t charmed. With a low roll, a negative answer wouldn’t mean much. A hidden roll allows uncertainty.
This section sums things up really well. The fact is that it is up to you. You'll get every response possible when asking DMs both experienced and inexperienced. I think what really sums up my viewpoint is that if your group is about the numbers, combat, and building the best possible characters, then there's nothing to gain from rolling in behind the screen. If however you run a heavily story focused game, then I personally think that rolling behind the screen allows for a level of DM fiat and popping a finger on scales (generally in favour of the players) to help them feel like heroes, or for their successes to feel great/small or anything in between. Moreover, if you're less experienced then Challenge Rating and creating suitable encounter balances is not straightforward in D&D 5e. There are real risks you'll accidentally choose an enemy that is slightly over or underpowered, and it is entirely possible that you don't realise that until three rounds into the fight (especially if less experienced). So keeping your rolls secret allows you to fix that 'mistake' on the fly.
Finally, much like setting a Difficulty Class keeping some rolls behind the screen allows you to change your mind if the outcome is unfavourable, or unfair in some way. I rarely if ever tell my players what the DC that they are trying to beat is. The reason here is because it allows for those moments where a player has an awesome roleplay moment, to not be disappointed when they roll just one below the DC. It basically minimises the DM workload a little, less stress for making up an unanticipated DC and getting it wrong.
My TL;DR here is that DMs rolling in secret allow the DM to be far, far more flexible than DMs who roll in the open.
P.S. - If you hide your rolls but want to prove your roll, there's no harm in lifting your screen to prove your roll if necessary (usually when players feel you're going too hard/rolling too well).
I think it sort of depends on what you want rolls to do for you...
Do you want rolls to add to the suspense of the story? Rolling in secret can be a great way to ratchet up the tension in a scene.
Do you want rolls to add to the group-feeling at the table? Rolling in public can allow the DM to participate in sympathizing with players who get a run of bad-luck or who face monsters that are having a run of good luck.
Do you want rolls not to interfere with immersion? Rolling in a dice tower so that the DM knows your result but you don't can help players stay immersed in scenes.
I always go behind a screen for two main reasons. 1. Sometimes, I fudge rolls. Usually either I have an uncommonly hot hand, or if I’ve accidentally overturned an encounter and it’s looking like a tpk will happen, and that tpk would be my fault. 2. Secret rolls. Also, sometimes, I’ll just roll a meaningless die. It keeps them on their toes. Otherwise, they’ll know I just did some kind of secret perception check and they start looking around for stuff. My players are usually good about not metagamimg too much, but I don’t like to temp them. So just the odd roll here and there, and then nothing happens is good to kind of desensitize them to me rolling.
I embrace the chaos and roll almost everything openly. I don't fudge to save a character, NPC, or plot path. Nor do I fudge to stop players from doing something amazing but unexpected (downing a dragon in one round, etc.).
I do this because I run open worlds and open plots so I don't care how a situation is resolved provided it's fun for the players, I just want to know how it resolves. The dice keep me nimble.
The only things I roll behind the screen are things the characters don't know. For example, someone takes the Hide action I roll and use their modifiers. I take note and the result is the DC for any NPC to know where the character is hiding.
Why? Because the character thinks they've hidden as well as they can. A roll of 1 or 20 should both feed into that perception until the action of some other character in the world makes it clear that they see the hiding character.
This also covers Persuasion checks. The character thinks they've been persuasive (or intimidating, etc.) and the response of the target NPC(s) communicates the true results. Good or bad.
Why? Because the character thinks they've hidden as well as they can. A roll of 1 or 20 should both feed into that perception until the action of some other character in the world makes it clear that they see the hiding character.
This also covers Persuasion checks. The character thinks they've been persuasive (or intimidating, etc.) and the response of the target NPC(s) communicates the true results. Good or bad.
I'm not so sure of this. To someone trained in Stealth, it doesn't make sense to me that they would fumble their Hide check and not know. That's like stepping in a pile of sticks or knocking over a flowerpot and still thinking you nailed it.
Same with Persuasion/Intimidation, when this is something you're good at you should at least get a sense that you have gone down the wrong path if you've rolled really poorly. How did you even become proficient if you have zero ability to judge your own performance? And since you generally get a telling response right away, what was even the point of hiding it?
Generally my answer to this is contested rolls. This way the player can have a sense of their own capability through seeing their own roll, but there's still some mystery as to how well the opposition rolled when the response doesn't indicate a clear success or failure.
Insight is the primary skill that I agree with rolling blind, because a poor Insight roll can mean you misread a cue and came to an incorrect conclusion. There's not a lot of room for self-evaluation there unless the information you get clearly conflicts with something you know to be true, which may or may not be apparent to the player.
Note that the DMG recommends caution when rolling "just to mess with your players." This is metagaming, which isn't inherently bad but certainly has pitfalls. Screwing with your players just because you can erodes trust, and if the players are always evaluating if something real is happening in the story or the DM is just messing with them, it breaks immersion and makes the game more about figuring out the DM than playing the story. If you want to play a game of direct player-to-player deceit, there are games designed for that. D&D is not one of them.
That bit about the rolling and keeping it secret is a huge deal in the 1e DMG. The aspect of stealth outcomes not being known is deliberately called out and described in detail.
The original DMG also suggests, several times, rolling to unnerve your characters. It is a bit of metagaming, but it is also part of the theatricality of it all that is part of a DM's job. It is stage dressing.
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'm not so sure of this. To someone trained in Stealth, it doesn't make sense to me that they would fumble their Hide check and not know. That's like stepping in a pile of sticks or knocking over a flowerpot and still thinking you nailed it."
Think of it less as a fumble and more as not factoring in an enemy's visual perspective. The character did their best, but sometimes that's not enough. Instead of letting them see the roll they learn it in the reactions of those enemies.
The fundamental difference is essentially metagmaing. If your rogue rolls a '1' on a Hide action and gets to see it, they'll immediately metagame a set of behaviors based on that knowledge. If the DM rolls and says "Ok you hide" the palyer will metagame being hidden. I don't think there's truly a wrong answer, and - in the case of my games - a critical failure would include me describing said failure but not the roll. The Pippin in Moria scene, where he knocks the skull down the well and broadcasts to all the goblins that someone is there - that's a critical failure description that makes it clear.
I also treat the Hide roll as the DC for others to vie against, so anything greater than '1' may result both in success and failure (vs everyone in the area's passive Perception).
Again, no wrong way to do this, it's all meta. I just like players having the extra tension of not knowing things that the characters wouldn't - until the world responds.
To the OP, in terms of rolling open or behind a screen, it is entirely up to you.
When I first started, years ago, I rolled behind a screen. However, I found this gives too much leeway to me as the DM to adjust the narrative by manipulating the die rolls. It also tends to mitigate against the worst outcomes the players could face. When the players realize this, the actions they take tend to become more risky or over the top because they have seen themselves succeeding at such tasks - basically the DM doesn't want them to fail/die, so they don't.
In these cases, rolling dice in the open actually adds to the tension since neither the DM nor the players really know the outcome - it comes down to whatever plan the players came up with and how well it works despite the vagaries of the dice.
As a result, I roll almost everything openly now. I find the players actually like this better and I find that when I am playing I prefer it as well. The DM still guides the narrative but they don't need the level of control that can be provided by fudging the die rolls to fit the outcome they want to see. The problem with hidden rolls is that the players don't know whether the DM is fudging or not - they don't know whether the win or loss was due to fate or to the DM stepping in to make sure the "cool" thing happens or to railroad the story in a way that is slightly less visible to the players.
In the other cases, the DM can either decide the result or roll a die behind the screen ... which from the player perspective is EXACTLY the same. The players can't tell when the DM is making it up and when they are accepting the influence of a die on a decision so the players can easily be left with the impression that everything hidden is simply the DM making up the answer they want to see for their narrative.
In terms of the character's knowing their die rolls - I also don't see a problem with a player knowing what they rolled. Knowing the number doesn't tell the player whether their attempt was successful or not though it will inform whether they think they did a good job or not - just not whether it was successful.
Roll a 20 on a skill check and a player will think that they did their best ... roll a 1 and the player will likely think that they did not do so well. However, there are lots of cases where the 20 will not succeed and a 1 on a skill check might - especially for higher modifiers at higher skill levels.
I always hide my rolls, for the reasons listed above, usually to either cool a hot hand, or sometimes to beef up rolls if my dice are being cranky and coming up 2 to hit a lot lol. I hide them because I don't want my players knowing everything. I also prefer, when feasible, to have my players roll in secret for things, like stealth, because metagaming is a thing and happens when one player flubs their stealth check. Our most recent session, I rolled a 6 on my attempt to hide, it was public so my party knew it. Another party member said she waved at me, and pointed directly at my character, showing me I was in fact, NOT well hidden. As a result I was offered a chance to roll again. The DM could have narrated my pathetic attempt as well, but the other player seeing the roll prompted her to respond in a way that just felt a little meta.
I won't fudge rolls if things in a fight are going "normally" as in players and monsters all rolling well or crap as the case may be. I won't negate an "out of nowhere" crit most times. I will turn a crit into a normal hit if the players have been taking a bad beating due to crazy high rolls by me and crap by them. While I enjoy the whole "chance" aspect, there are times when fate is grumpy and can turn a fun session into an exercise in frustration pretty quick. We play to have fun, not get pissed off at bad dice rolls. Also to note, I tend to roll a fair bit of "nothing" dice while the party travels. I find it really keeps them on edge and they have NO idea when something is truly about to happen or I am just amusing myself. Tension building for the win lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Personally, I roll everything on the table and I expect players to all do the same. I choose not to do dice roll fudging.
There are a couple of exceptions.
I roll saving throws for monsters in secret because I like to use illusions and I don't want players having the metadata of the lack of a saving throw.
GM: The spell doesn't affect the enemy. Player: He didn't even roll a d20. That must mean the target is invalid. It's an illusion everyone!
I allow (and encourage) players to roll death saving throws in secret, to increase tension among players. The rest of the table only knows the state of the character when someone spends an action tending to the downed character. As an aside, I also allow players to just plain make up these rolls. If they really don't want their character to die then they are free to ignore bad rolls. If they want to get up with a nat 20 they have to show us the 20, however.
Personally, I roll everything on the table and I expect players to all do the same. I choose not to do dice roll fudging.
There are a couple of exceptions.
I roll saving throws for monsters in secret because I like to use illusions and I don't want players having the metadata of the lack of a saving throw.
GM: The spell doesn't affect the enemy. Player: He didn't even roll a d20. That must mean the target is invalid. It's an illusion everyone!
I allow (and encourage) players to roll death saving throws in secret, to increase tension among players. The rest of the table only knows the state of the character when someone spends an action tending to the downed character. As an aside, I also allow players to just plain make up these rolls. If they really don't want their character to die then they are free to ignore bad rolls. If they want to get up with a nat 20 they have to show us the 20, however.
i refuse to fudge thats something youd do to keep a kids game fun so they dont lose intrest but to me d&d is an adaptive story yeah you don't want your rouge to die but hey he died and your bard played a song to kift party moral
Personally I roll behind the screen. For one thing, it's more convenient as I sit at the end of the table and would have to stand up or lean around my screen each time. For another, it adds to the mystery of the game. Finally, on rare occasions where I need to, it aids in fudging.
The first point doesn't need elaborating, but the mystery side of it is important. For one thing, if I roll damage and it does 6 damage, was that 1d6+0 damage rolling maximum, or was it 5d12+1 rolling minimum? These are the things that players need to experience the doubt of. Sometimes, however, I will show my roll to the players - often to the players who aren't interacting. Notably, last session saw an intimidation roll to stop some horses, so I rolled for them as a contested Wisdom roll to see how they did. As the player told me they had rolled a 23, I showed the other players the nat 1 I had just rolled. That way, everyone knew something was about to happen.
The second point is a rarity, but sometimes the dice roll disproportionately and I need to intervene. This might include a fight where the enemy repeatedly rolls minimum damage, making it a cakewalk, or where they get critical hits over and over again. I feel Fudging should never be done to try and achieve a specific outcome (otherwise, why roll?), but it should be used by the DM if the combat risks becoming less fun. Nobody wants to spend an hour or more of real time going through a fight when they aren't taking any damage, and therefore perceive no threat. They want to feel challenged, and sometimes random chance needs a tweak to make that happen!
ok so still being newto d&d and dming i'm unsure as to how a dm should roll like should all my rolls be behind the screen or should npc,monster and dm pc rolls be done in view of my players and am i right in saying a dm roll for say deciding how a story point will play out ie player asks npc "are you telling the truth(npc is lying)" roll is lets say nat20 "ok i'm lying and heres why(massive plot here)" would be behind the screen
Or is it the playgroups house rule?
in a hole in the ground you notice a halfling
It is however you want it to be.
My rule is that things that players do not see or know about is rolled secretly.
I also do not roll for things which don't need to be rolled for. Rolling is for times when the element of chance is involved.
In your example, if a player checks to see if an NPC is lying, the player would have to roll against a DC of 20 minus their Charisma modifier (this is a call on my part, not a rule), and success would tell them that the NPC is lying -- but not what they lied about it.
As a DM, I wouldn't roll at all.
My rolls are not always behind the screen. Sometimes I will roll openly (mostly because it creates a different kind of vibe in the moment), but I do mostly roll secretly, and inpart because sometimes I just roll dice for no reason other than the theatricality of it.
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 guess too i'd sometimes roll a dice to decide how i want an npc to react i.e fail = angry success = forgiving
I like the idea that players neednt know why i roll lol
Would my initive attack roles be better in plain site to show i run a fair fight?
in a hole in the ground you notice a halfling
When you're DMing then you run the game the way you believe is best. No pressure, but it's all on you.
As for my advice, I think for something along the lines of a NPC's deception check it should be hidden from the players. If the players see you roll a five and then you tell them "you believe the NPC is lying" and the next time you roll a 19 and you tell them "you believe the NPC is telling the truth" then they know the deception check was successful so won't trust the NPC.
For combat it's doesn't make that much difference. It is nice that they know you're not fudging. But if they see you roll a 15 and then you say "Ok, that's a 30 to hit..." they're going to instantly know how tough the NPC they're fighting is.
I would highly suggest reading the following section of the Dungeon Master's Guide (DMG) - Running the Game - Dungeon Master’s Guide - Sources - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
This section sums things up really well. The fact is that it is up to you. You'll get every response possible when asking DMs both experienced and inexperienced. I think what really sums up my viewpoint is that if your group is about the numbers, combat, and building the best possible characters, then there's nothing to gain from rolling in behind the screen. If however you run a heavily story focused game, then I personally think that rolling behind the screen allows for a level of DM fiat and popping a finger on scales (generally in favour of the players) to help them feel like heroes, or for their successes to feel great/small or anything in between. Moreover, if you're less experienced then Challenge Rating and creating suitable encounter balances is not straightforward in D&D 5e. There are real risks you'll accidentally choose an enemy that is slightly over or underpowered, and it is entirely possible that you don't realise that until three rounds into the fight (especially if less experienced). So keeping your rolls secret allows you to fix that 'mistake' on the fly.
Finally, much like setting a Difficulty Class keeping some rolls behind the screen allows you to change your mind if the outcome is unfavourable, or unfair in some way. I rarely if ever tell my players what the DC that they are trying to beat is. The reason here is because it allows for those moments where a player has an awesome roleplay moment, to not be disappointed when they roll just one below the DC. It basically minimises the DM workload a little, less stress for making up an unanticipated DC and getting it wrong.
My TL;DR here is that DMs rolling in secret allow the DM to be far, far more flexible than DMs who roll in the open.
P.S. - If you hide your rolls but want to prove your roll, there's no harm in lifting your screen to prove your roll if necessary (usually when players feel you're going too hard/rolling too well).
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I think it sort of depends on what you want rolls to do for you...
Do you want rolls to add to the suspense of the story? Rolling in secret can be a great way to ratchet up the tension in a scene.
Do you want rolls to add to the group-feeling at the table? Rolling in public can allow the DM to participate in sympathizing with players who get a run of bad-luck or who face monsters that are having a run of good luck.
Do you want rolls not to interfere with immersion? Rolling in a dice tower so that the DM knows your result but you don't can help players stay immersed in scenes.
I always go behind a screen for two main reasons. 1. Sometimes, I fudge rolls. Usually either I have an uncommonly hot hand, or if I’ve accidentally overturned an encounter and it’s looking like a tpk will happen, and that tpk would be my fault.
2. Secret rolls.
Also, sometimes, I’ll just roll a meaningless die. It keeps them on their toes. Otherwise, they’ll know I just did some kind of secret perception check and they start looking around for stuff. My players are usually good about not metagamimg too much, but I don’t like to temp them. So just the odd roll here and there, and then nothing happens is good to kind of desensitize them to me rolling.
I embrace the chaos and roll almost everything openly. I don't fudge to save a character, NPC, or plot path. Nor do I fudge to stop players from doing something amazing but unexpected (downing a dragon in one round, etc.).
I do this because I run open worlds and open plots so I don't care how a situation is resolved provided it's fun for the players, I just want to know how it resolves. The dice keep me nimble.
The only things I roll behind the screen are things the characters don't know. For example, someone takes the Hide action I roll and use their modifiers. I take note and the result is the DC for any NPC to know where the character is hiding.
Why? Because the character thinks they've hidden as well as they can. A roll of 1 or 20 should both feed into that perception until the action of some other character in the world makes it clear that they see the hiding character.
This also covers Persuasion checks. The character thinks they've been persuasive (or intimidating, etc.) and the response of the target NPC(s) communicates the true results. Good or bad.
I'm not so sure of this. To someone trained in Stealth, it doesn't make sense to me that they would fumble their Hide check and not know. That's like stepping in a pile of sticks or knocking over a flowerpot and still thinking you nailed it.
Same with Persuasion/Intimidation, when this is something you're good at you should at least get a sense that you have gone down the wrong path if you've rolled really poorly. How did you even become proficient if you have zero ability to judge your own performance? And since you generally get a telling response right away, what was even the point of hiding it?
Generally my answer to this is contested rolls. This way the player can have a sense of their own capability through seeing their own roll, but there's still some mystery as to how well the opposition rolled when the response doesn't indicate a clear success or failure.
Insight is the primary skill that I agree with rolling blind, because a poor Insight roll can mean you misread a cue and came to an incorrect conclusion. There's not a lot of room for self-evaluation there unless the information you get clearly conflicts with something you know to be true, which may or may not be apparent to the player.
Note that the DMG recommends caution when rolling "just to mess with your players." This is metagaming, which isn't inherently bad but certainly has pitfalls. Screwing with your players just because you can erodes trust, and if the players are always evaluating if something real is happening in the story or the DM is just messing with them, it breaks immersion and makes the game more about figuring out the DM than playing the story. If you want to play a game of direct player-to-player deceit, there are games designed for that. D&D is not one of them.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
That bit about the rolling and keeping it secret is a huge deal in the 1e DMG. The aspect of stealth outcomes not being known is deliberately called out and described in detail.
The original DMG also suggests, several times, rolling to unnerve your characters. It is a bit of metagaming, but it is also part of the theatricality of it all that is part of a DM's job. It is stage dressing.
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'm not sure if this is ad&d/1e or what ever but gygax wanted the dm to be a disembodied voice coming from a purpose built box room
in a hole in the ground you notice a halfling
"I'm not so sure of this. To someone trained in Stealth, it doesn't make sense to me that they would fumble their Hide check and not know. That's like stepping in a pile of sticks or knocking over a flowerpot and still thinking you nailed it."
Think of it less as a fumble and more as not factoring in an enemy's visual perspective. The character did their best, but sometimes that's not enough. Instead of letting them see the roll they learn it in the reactions of those enemies.
The fundamental difference is essentially metagmaing. If your rogue rolls a '1' on a Hide action and gets to see it, they'll immediately metagame a set of behaviors based on that knowledge. If the DM rolls and says "Ok you hide" the palyer will metagame being hidden. I don't think there's truly a wrong answer, and - in the case of my games - a critical failure would include me describing said failure but not the roll. The Pippin in Moria scene, where he knocks the skull down the well and broadcasts to all the goblins that someone is there - that's a critical failure description that makes it clear.
I also treat the Hide roll as the DC for others to vie against, so anything greater than '1' may result both in success and failure (vs everyone in the area's passive Perception).
Again, no wrong way to do this, it's all meta. I just like players having the extra tension of not knowing things that the characters wouldn't - until the world responds.
To the OP, in terms of rolling open or behind a screen, it is entirely up to you.
When I first started, years ago, I rolled behind a screen. However, I found this gives too much leeway to me as the DM to adjust the narrative by manipulating the die rolls. It also tends to mitigate against the worst outcomes the players could face. When the players realize this, the actions they take tend to become more risky or over the top because they have seen themselves succeeding at such tasks - basically the DM doesn't want them to fail/die, so they don't.
In these cases, rolling dice in the open actually adds to the tension since neither the DM nor the players really know the outcome - it comes down to whatever plan the players came up with and how well it works despite the vagaries of the dice.
As a result, I roll almost everything openly now. I find the players actually like this better and I find that when I am playing I prefer it as well. The DM still guides the narrative but they don't need the level of control that can be provided by fudging the die rolls to fit the outcome they want to see. The problem with hidden rolls is that the players don't know whether the DM is fudging or not - they don't know whether the win or loss was due to fate or to the DM stepping in to make sure the "cool" thing happens or to railroad the story in a way that is slightly less visible to the players.
In the other cases, the DM can either decide the result or roll a die behind the screen ... which from the player perspective is EXACTLY the same. The players can't tell when the DM is making it up and when they are accepting the influence of a die on a decision so the players can easily be left with the impression that everything hidden is simply the DM making up the answer they want to see for their narrative.
In terms of the character's knowing their die rolls - I also don't see a problem with a player knowing what they rolled. Knowing the number doesn't tell the player whether their attempt was successful or not though it will inform whether they think they did a good job or not - just not whether it was successful.
Roll a 20 on a skill check and a player will think that they did their best ... roll a 1 and the player will likely think that they did not do so well. However, there are lots of cases where the 20 will not succeed and a 1 on a skill check might - especially for higher modifiers at higher skill levels.
I always hide my rolls, for the reasons listed above, usually to either cool a hot hand, or sometimes to beef up rolls if my dice are being cranky and coming up 2 to hit a lot lol. I hide them because I don't want my players knowing everything. I also prefer, when feasible, to have my players roll in secret for things, like stealth, because metagaming is a thing and happens when one player flubs their stealth check. Our most recent session, I rolled a 6 on my attempt to hide, it was public so my party knew it. Another party member said she waved at me, and pointed directly at my character, showing me I was in fact, NOT well hidden. As a result I was offered a chance to roll again. The DM could have narrated my pathetic attempt as well, but the other player seeing the roll prompted her to respond in a way that just felt a little meta.
I won't fudge rolls if things in a fight are going "normally" as in players and monsters all rolling well or crap as the case may be. I won't negate an "out of nowhere" crit most times. I will turn a crit into a normal hit if the players have been taking a bad beating due to crazy high rolls by me and crap by them. While I enjoy the whole "chance" aspect, there are times when fate is grumpy and can turn a fun session into an exercise in frustration pretty quick. We play to have fun, not get pissed off at bad dice rolls. Also to note, I tend to roll a fair bit of "nothing" dice while the party travels. I find it really keeps them on edge and they have NO idea when something is truly about to happen or I am just amusing myself. Tension building for the win lol.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Personally, I roll everything on the table and I expect players to all do the same. I choose not to do dice roll fudging.
There are a couple of exceptions.
I roll saving throws for monsters in secret because I like to use illusions and I don't want players having the metadata of the lack of a saving throw.
GM: The spell doesn't affect the enemy.
Player: He didn't even roll a d20. That must mean the target is invalid. It's an illusion everyone!
I allow (and encourage) players to roll death saving throws in secret, to increase tension among players. The rest of the table only knows the state of the character when someone spends an action tending to the downed character. As an aside, I also allow players to just plain make up these rolls. If they really don't want their character to die then they are free to ignore bad rolls. If they want to get up with a nat 20 they have to show us the 20, however.
i refuse to fudge thats something youd do to keep a kids game fun so they dont lose intrest but to me d&d is an adaptive story yeah you don't want your rouge to die but hey he died and your bard played a song to kift party moral
in a hole in the ground you notice a halfling
Personally I roll behind the screen. For one thing, it's more convenient as I sit at the end of the table and would have to stand up or lean around my screen each time. For another, it adds to the mystery of the game. Finally, on rare occasions where I need to, it aids in fudging.
The first point doesn't need elaborating, but the mystery side of it is important. For one thing, if I roll damage and it does 6 damage, was that 1d6+0 damage rolling maximum, or was it 5d12+1 rolling minimum? These are the things that players need to experience the doubt of. Sometimes, however, I will show my roll to the players - often to the players who aren't interacting. Notably, last session saw an intimidation roll to stop some horses, so I rolled for them as a contested Wisdom roll to see how they did. As the player told me they had rolled a 23, I showed the other players the nat 1 I had just rolled. That way, everyone knew something was about to happen.
The second point is a rarity, but sometimes the dice roll disproportionately and I need to intervene. This might include a fight where the enemy repeatedly rolls minimum damage, making it a cakewalk, or where they get critical hits over and over again. I feel Fudging should never be done to try and achieve a specific outcome (otherwise, why roll?), but it should be used by the DM if the combat risks becoming less fun. Nobody wants to spend an hour or more of real time going through a fight when they aren't taking any damage, and therefore perceive no threat. They want to feel challenged, and sometimes random chance needs a tweak to make that happen!
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!