I don't give out Skill DC. Sometimes I don't even know the specific number I'm looking for. If it's in the 10 range and they're proficient, I don't even ask for a roll. I usually go with the better you roll, the better your success. Example: for things like foraging or tracking. You find a little food or you find a lot of food. You find a trail that only goes 30 feet, you find a trail leading you to the enemy camp. It has better feel than pass/fail.
I do give out Saving Throw DC. It's just easier to tell them what the DC is and the damage. They can figure out if they should half the damage or whatever.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
Generally no. However, I will often give the character an idea of how difficult a task seems if it is possible for them to make such an assessment. If a task should be easy for a character of their skill ... I may let them know. Similarly, if it looks really challenging, I might also let them know. If it looks impossible for them to succeed on, if the character looks at the job and just knows that they can't succeed, I will also tell them that.
Examples:
- a DC10 lock to a rogue with thieves tools - "this should be really easy"
- a DC15 athetics check - to the 8 strength wizard without athletics - "this looks really hard", to the 1st level 16 strength barbarian with athletics proficiency - "looks like an average task"
On the other hand, something with a very high DC or something that just isn't possible.
- a DC 25 persuasion check to convince an NPC to take a particular course of action (this assumes that the NPC might actually listen and could be convinced) ... many times characters suggest a course of action that will never succeed with their intended goal and I just narrate the result as the character trying to convince the NPC and failing.
As for AC, the characters usually figure it out within a round or two given what die rolls hit and miss and knowing their modifiers so it isn't a big deal. However, if a creature is wearing a recognizable armor type, I will usually include that in the description and the players can reach their own conclusions.
I dont. I just start asking for skill checks and whatnot. Hell, sometimes I dont even know when there is going to be one. Then all of the sudden it just sounds right. Actually I so have one coming up with the big bad at the end of the campaign. Not telling them.
Yes I usually try to anticipate what they might want to do (search a room, disarm trap, etc) and pre-determine DCs, so that it is as objective as possible. But often they will ask to do something I didn't expect and then I just have to make up a DC and try to be as reasonable about it as possible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
For the most part, when I DM I treat very few skill checks as binary pass / fails - I prefer to have degrees of how well, or how badly it went. So in that regard, I wouldn't often have a DC to tell the players as such.
An example from the last session my group had on Tuesday evening, the players were travelling along a southbound road towards the capital; one on horseback kind of scouting ahead a little, and the other five spread across two wagons. I asked the rider, and the two players driving the wagons to make checks to see how well they handled it; the rider ended up with a 23, one wagon driver got an 18 and the other driver (the only party member with land vehicle proficiency, obviously) rolled a 6. There was nothing to pass / fail really, but the way I put it was that the rider was moving almost as one with her horse, as though she was born in the saddle, the novice driver was being so attentive to the road that she managed to find the ideal path every single time so they barely felt the motion, whilst the 'expert' driver was managing to hit every bump, every ridge, every stone in the road so that he and his passenger's arses were like tenderised steak by the end of the day.
I would not add it just because conceptually, if he had cast it, it would have given him the bonus. Secret rolls only take account of what is happening, not what might have happened.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Question for the DM's that roll for the players without letting them know they made an unknown skill check:
What do you do if your party has a Cleric with the guidance cantrip? Do you add the D4 also?
If they don't know they're making the roll, they can't choose to add Guidance (or Bardic Inspiration, or w/e) to the roll, though bonuses that always apply (such as Bless) can be added.
Question for the DM's that roll for the players without letting them know they made an unknown skill check:
What do you do if your party has a Cleric with the guidance cantrip? Do you add the D4 also?
If they don't know they're making the roll, they can't choose to add Guidance (or Bardic Inspiration, or w/e) to the roll, though bonuses that always apply (such as Bless) can be added.
For those kind of roll bonuses it should be the player that decides whether to add to the roll or not rather than their character, even more so if they have the lucky feat or similar roll replacement ability.
For those kind of roll bonuses it should be the player that decides whether to add to the roll or not rather than their character, even more so if they have the lucky feat or similar roll replacement ability.
There's no real way of doing that ("I'm making a roll on your behalf, I can't tell you what it's for or what you rolled. Would you like to use luck?"). I resolve this by mostly using passive scores (as a target number) in this situation.
How can a player add it when they don't know it's happening? They can't ......there just seems to be a little something wrong with that (in my opinion)
What does the DM do if the Cleric tells the other members of the party: "I have the guidance cantrip. If you ever need to make an ability check consider yourself 'guided' and add a D4 to the roll." Do you allow that?
How can a player add it when they don't know it's happening? They can't ......there just seems to be a little something wrong with that (in my opinion)
What does the DM do if the Cleric tells the other members of the party: "I have the guidance cantrip. If you ever need to make an ability check consider yourself 'guided' and add a D4 to the roll." Do you allow that?
No. Too many situations where it wouldn't be the case.
How can a player add it when they don't know it's happening? They can't ......there just seems to be a little something wrong with that (in my opinion)
What does the DM do if the Cleric tells the other members of the party: "I have the guidance cantrip. If you ever need to make an ability check consider yourself 'guided' and add a D4 to the roll." Do you allow that?
The player should always know the check is happening. In the case of guidance, the bonus only gets added if the characters know that they need to do something ahead of time, or if they're going around attracting attention by chanting spells all the time to keep the spell up. In that case I would probably eventually have them start making CON checks or lose their voice.
Thanks to everyone for the insight on my questions. I appreciate it.
I DM'd years ago (AD&D) and have been thinking about giving it another try. Maybe I'm a bit more mature now and I wont put another Girdle of Femininity/Masculinity in the treasure hoard this time. LOL my friend didn't appreciate his character suddenly being a Woman
As a rule, I don't, but on very rare occasion I will. It's kind of an in-the-moment thing. And usually if I do, I'll say it afterwards. Part of that is because I let my players roll physical dice - and while I do trust all my players to be honest, I still want to make sure I can keep them honest by not saying the DC ahead of time.
I usually only give them a vague difficulty like "this will be hard" or "you have a very small chance of getting this". This is mostly to keep immersion intact.
In general, I will tell players the DC of a saving throw just to keep things moving at the table. For an ability check, I might or might not, depending on the situation and whether the mystery adds to the experience--usually it doesn't. I don't tell the players the AC of an enemy, but my players are smart, and they have that nailed down to within a point or two by the time the first round has ended.
EDIT: I also make the vast majority of my DM rolls in the open, only hiding rolls when they need to be secret for the story. It also means the players really perk up when I roll behind the screen because it means something is up.
Periodically, calling the DC right before the roll is attempted can make pivotal rolls more exciting. Everyone knowing the number that needs to be rolled and watching the dice to see if it happens can be a lot more eventful than just having the DM tell you if it failed or succeeded.
Brenan Lee Muligan does this and it really does add a lot to his games.
Most of the time yes I do give them the DC. But I do roll in the open also.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
I don't give out AC
I don't give out Skill DC. Sometimes I don't even know the specific number I'm looking for. If it's in the 10 range and they're proficient, I don't even ask for a roll. I usually go with the better you roll, the better your success. Example: for things like foraging or tracking. You find a little food or you find a lot of food. You find a trail that only goes 30 feet, you find a trail leading you to the enemy camp. It has better feel than pass/fail.
I do give out Saving Throw DC. It's just easier to tell them what the DC is and the damage. They can figure out if they should half the damage or whatever.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Generally no. However, I will often give the character an idea of how difficult a task seems if it is possible for them to make such an assessment. If a task should be easy for a character of their skill ... I may let them know. Similarly, if it looks really challenging, I might also let them know. If it looks impossible for them to succeed on, if the character looks at the job and just knows that they can't succeed, I will also tell them that.
Examples:
- a DC10 lock to a rogue with thieves tools - "this should be really easy"
- a DC15 athetics check - to the 8 strength wizard without athletics - "this looks really hard", to the 1st level 16 strength barbarian with athletics proficiency - "looks like an average task"
On the other hand, something with a very high DC or something that just isn't possible.
- a DC 25 persuasion check to convince an NPC to take a particular course of action (this assumes that the NPC might actually listen and could be convinced) ... many times characters suggest a course of action that will never succeed with their intended goal and I just narrate the result as the character trying to convince the NPC and failing.
As for AC, the characters usually figure it out within a round or two given what die rolls hit and miss and knowing their modifiers so it isn't a big deal. However, if a creature is wearing a recognizable armor type, I will usually include that in the description and the players can reach their own conclusions.
I dont. I just start asking for skill checks and whatnot. Hell, sometimes I dont even know when there is going to be one. Then all of the sudden it just sounds right. Actually I so have one coming up with the big bad at the end of the campaign. Not telling them.
Yes I usually try to anticipate what they might want to do (search a room, disarm trap, etc) and pre-determine DCs, so that it is as objective as possible. But often they will ask to do something I didn't expect and then I just have to make up a DC and try to be as reasonable about it as possible.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
For the most part, when I DM I treat very few skill checks as binary pass / fails - I prefer to have degrees of how well, or how badly it went. So in that regard, I wouldn't often have a DC to tell the players as such.
An example from the last session my group had on Tuesday evening, the players were travelling along a southbound road towards the capital; one on horseback kind of scouting ahead a little, and the other five spread across two wagons. I asked the rider, and the two players driving the wagons to make checks to see how well they handled it; the rider ended up with a 23, one wagon driver got an 18 and the other driver (the only party member with land vehicle proficiency, obviously) rolled a 6. There was nothing to pass / fail really, but the way I put it was that the rider was moving almost as one with her horse, as though she was born in the saddle, the novice driver was being so attentive to the road that she managed to find the ideal path every single time so they barely felt the motion, whilst the 'expert' driver was managing to hit every bump, every ridge, every stone in the road so that he and his passenger's arses were like tenderised steak by the end of the day.
Question for the DM's that roll for the players without letting them know they made an unknown skill check:
What do you do if your party has a Cleric with the guidance cantrip? Do you add the D4 also?
If it's active and he's concentrating, yes.
I would not add it just because conceptually, if he had cast it, it would have given him the bonus. Secret rolls only take account of what is happening, not what might have happened.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
If they don't know they're making the roll, they can't choose to add Guidance (or Bardic Inspiration, or w/e) to the roll, though bonuses that always apply (such as Bless) can be added.
For those kind of roll bonuses it should be the player that decides whether to add to the roll or not rather than their character, even more so if they have the lucky feat or similar roll replacement ability.
There's no real way of doing that ("I'm making a roll on your behalf, I can't tell you what it's for or what you rolled. Would you like to use luck?"). I resolve this by mostly using passive scores (as a target number) in this situation.
How can a player add it when they don't know it's happening? They can't ......there just seems to be a little something wrong with that (in my opinion)
What does the DM do if the Cleric tells the other members of the party: "I have the guidance cantrip. If you ever need to make an ability check consider yourself 'guided' and add a D4 to the roll." Do you allow that?
No. Too many situations where it wouldn't be the case.
The player should always know the check is happening. In the case of guidance, the bonus only gets added if the characters know that they need to do something ahead of time, or if they're going around attracting attention by chanting spells all the time to keep the spell up. In that case I would probably eventually have them start making CON checks or lose their voice.
Thanks to everyone for the insight on my questions. I appreciate it.
I DM'd years ago (AD&D) and have been thinking about giving it another try. Maybe I'm a bit more mature now and I wont put another Girdle of Femininity/Masculinity in the treasure hoard this time. LOL my friend didn't appreciate his character suddenly being a Woman
As a rule, I don't, but on very rare occasion I will. It's kind of an in-the-moment thing. And usually if I do, I'll say it afterwards. Part of that is because I let my players roll physical dice - and while I do trust all my players to be honest, I still want to make sure I can keep them honest by not saying the DC ahead of time.
But as a rule: no.
I usually only give them a vague difficulty like "this will be hard" or "you have a very small chance of getting this". This is mostly to keep immersion intact.
How do you accomplish that?
In general, I will tell players the DC of a saving throw just to keep things moving at the table. For an ability check, I might or might not, depending on the situation and whether the mystery adds to the experience--usually it doesn't. I don't tell the players the AC of an enemy, but my players are smart, and they have that nailed down to within a point or two by the time the first round has ended.
EDIT: I also make the vast majority of my DM rolls in the open, only hiding rolls when they need to be secret for the story. It also means the players really perk up when I roll behind the screen because it means something is up.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Periodically, calling the DC right before the roll is attempted can make pivotal rolls more exciting. Everyone knowing the number that needs to be rolled and watching the dice to see if it happens can be a lot more eventful than just having the DM tell you if it failed or succeeded.
Brenan Lee Muligan does this and it really does add a lot to his games.