[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




File: screens.jpg (73 KB, 570x713)
73 KB
73 KB JPG
All perception? Death rolls?

Mostly playing Shadow of the Demon Lord and various d20 mutations, also some nWoD.

Thanks!
>>
>>85533386
I've never used a screen. If I want something to happen it happens, and if I want a die to decide I roll one.
>>
>>85533442
yeah but some rolls are better hidden behind the screen no?

trying to find out what the arguments are in this debate

I kinda feel it has to be very useful for tension if, for example, I roll the saves for some characters behind a screen... Did the Charm work on that chaos knight? We'll see when it's his turn...
>>
>>85533386
My opinion is that the only rolls happening behind the screen should be rolls from the gm for the gm.
And those just happen when the gm is randomizing something, so otherwise there is no need for thwn
>>
>>85533386
screen not necessary for rolls unless cheating or players are too retarded to not meta. elstwise it hides maps and notes.
>>
At a minimum, things players should not know the results of like perception checks. In person I roll most things behind the screen just because that's where it's easier to roll and I only roll in front of the screen when there's some danger of characters getting killed or really fucked up.

Online, it's like the opposite because I use the dice rolling tool and I have to dig out a physical die to roll otherwise.

If you have extremely meta players you can fuck with them by rolling dice behind your screen for no reason.
>>
>>85533386
Either everything or nothing.
>>
>>85533386
Being an advocate for anti storyshitting policies my screen is used for three purposes in order of priority: 1) Quick reference to the most often used data. 2) Hiding rolls so as not to clue the players in that something important is happening behind the scenes or rather screen 3) When by player observation of the result the player may be able to infer some game rules knowledge the character wouldn't know.
Otherwise all rolls are in the open.
>>
>>85533846
That's exactly what I'm looking for, a great summary.

Can you please go into detail about which rolls mentioned in section 2 of your post you use?

Thank you!
>>
>>85533386
Screens are used if either the GM or the players are shitters. If no one is a cunt then the scren is not required.
>>
>>85533945
well none of my players are cunts, can handle metagame...

but we kinda feel some rolls are more tense and interesting if hidden - its not about shittery, but making the game feel better in some ways
>>
>>85533873
He's talking about things like random encounter checks and other checks that enemies are making against the players like stealth checks by ambushing enemies they haven't seen yet or perception checks by enemies on the other side of doors or both a deception check AND the player's perception check unless you just want to use passive if they don't even suspect they might be being lied to - however just rolling anything while an NPC is talking or when players get close to enemies can arouse suspicion which is why I advocate occasional meaningless rolls with very meta players. It's fun to watch them squirm for no reason and eventually it conditions them to not get so jumpy about hidden rolls.
>>
>>85533846
>3) When by player observation of the result the player may be able to infer some game rules knowledge the character wouldn't know.
unless you're running some original homebrew system the player can read the same rulebook you use making this one feel kinda arbitrary
>>
>>85533386
If someone starts getting really cocky just roll a bunch of dice, look really concerned, ask them to roll perception or the game's equivalent of a will save or whatever, breathe in all worried like a mechanic looking at something expensive, then steel yourself and say "Okay!" really bright like you're trying to hide that something terrible is happening.
Then carry on like nothing happened.

But for real, some checks are best hidden, and this depends on the game and the GM.
People need to not see how many enemies are rolling perception on them if they don't know the enemies are there, for example.
>>
>>85534009
a character shouldn't know how much damage a creature does generally though, especially if it has some special ability that lets it do something outside the norm
>>
>>85533873
>Can you please go into detail about which rolls mentioned in section 2
This >>85534005
>>85534009
>unless you're running some original homebrew system the player can read the same rulebook you use making this one feel kinda arbitrary
Not if it's things like an opponent's to hit bonus and so forth.
>>
>>85533386
So the players have a harder time knowing what a monster/NPC's stats are mostly
>>
>>85533468
They don't know what you're even rolling for half the time. Sometimes they don't even know what they're rolling for.

Here's the thing, at a small table with 4 people it's still not easy to see what someone rolls if they roll close. If there's a book on the table and I intentionally roll close they'd have to crane their necks to see the outcome and still might miss it. And they still would need to know what the context for the roll even is. A high number could be good or bad for them, they don't know.

So you don't need something to intentionally hide numbers from them really. The only screen I have is just a cheat sheet for numbers and details from the book. I don't even set it up as a screen because it's harder to read that way.

Sometimes you roll so your players can see, sometimes you need a private roll for your own benefit, sometimes you make decisions about what happens and don't need to roll for it.

Sometimes though, a roll out of view just for the sound of it can make your players tense up. I've rolled for literally nothing before just for the drama of it.
>>
>>85533468
>yeah but some rolls are better hidden behind the screen no?
No. The only reasons are to prevent metagaming but if the player is memorizing charts and extrpolating that shit from your rolls more power to them.
If you need the clatter of dice they can't see to add 'drama' to your game you're a shit dm who can't describe contextual circumstances.
There is no reasons for a dm screen other than quick references for notes. All rolls should be in the open. Anyone who isn't is going to fudge rolls to cheat themselves and their players.
>>
>>85534424
>I want my players to know when an NPC is lying or telling the truth even if their character doesn't know it
Imagine being this wrong - and it doesn't rewrite memorizing tables to see when one number is way bigger than another number

Inb4 "my players play according to character knowledge even if it's going to make life harder or lead them into mortal danger." Bull fucking shit. Never has there ever been such a player other than brown nosers who expected their good boy meta points to earn them good boy meta benefits later, which is even worse.
>>
>>85534567
hey and even if they do stick to IC knowledge at all times, I think many players actually like it when they "don't know" (don't see the results of some rolls) because it makes it more dramatic

looking for some situations when rolling behind the screen makes sense (even if it's just a book I hide the roll behind)
>>
>>85533386
That is some nice dovetail ing, the contrast in woods really pops
>>
>>85533442
I never used a screen since I find them kinda corny and authoritative, but this weird superiority people online have when they don't use them is way cornier
>>
>>85534060
>Not if it's things like an opponent's to hit bonus and so forth.
If you can see something fighting, shouldn't it be obvious how good/bad they are?
>>
Everything, because I basically run nothing RAW and apply balance as needed. If I roll in the open and make the adjustments I need then the rules lawyers of the group will bitch
before you ask I'm currently running 4 separate games and all of them have at least one rules lawyer
>>
i roll most of my "setup" rolls behind something. that gives them the sound of the die hitting the table (accompanied by the context I provide in the scene) without the knowledge their characters wouldn't have, like whether the rogue knows they're spotted etc. this is how my players prefer it, and who am I to tell them otherwise?

but big rolls, especially the ones that could kill a PC, or a saving throw that a BBEG must make or die, i roll in front of everyone. the drama of a sequence like that should never be denied from the players. i tend to announce what the target must be for X or Y to happen (whether I fluff the modifiers is another conversation), but the tension of dice falling is a huge component of "play to find out what happens" which is the governing principle at my table.
>>
>>85534613
I agree completely. Mechanics are the enemy of immersion. I am really bad to explain to players why something happened even when they aren't demanding to know because they don't like it, because it's more fun to explain a neat thing that didn't fuck them than one that did. I need to reign that shit in at least at the table.
>>
>>85533386
I find it is best if all dm rolls happen behind the screen. It leaves more mystery.
>>
>>85534613
>looking for some situations when rolling behind the screen makes sense (even if it's just a book I hide the roll behind)
I think I basically covered the vast majority of them earlier
>Opposed deception/persuasion vs perception contests to know is an NPC is telling the truth
>Stealth vs perception contests when the players don't know where the enemies are (or if)
>Random encounters or other checks that might result in one of the above

That covers 95% of it. Sometimes they might do something or go somewhere you didn't prep for and you might want to conceal that type determining it randomly. Like for example my current players like to latch into throwaway NPCs that I just make up on the spot so I'll end up rolling their applicable stat at the same time I roll for them to do something more than the one-dimensional thing they were intended for.
>>
>>85535114
hey yeah thanks!
>>
>>85534760
>If you can see something fighting, shouldn't it be obvious how good/bad they are?
Put it like this anon, have you watched say fencing and thought that fencer oh he's about a +5 to hit and his opponent is about +3 to hit, where did you pluck those numbers from? And the same question again but this time you live in a fantasy world where no concept of a role playing game exists or the numbers governing the rules that assign those bonuses much less the fact you are aware your existence is governed by the rules of a game?
Try not to be a retard.
>>
>>85536028
Have you ever heard of betting?
More to the point, I have a clear idea of whose form is better and who is getting the best of each exchange. The only way to clearly communicate that to players is with reference to mechanics, unless you're all experts on fencing or have a visual aid of some kind.
>>
>>85533386
You roll behind the screen when the result being high or low could give away the outcome.
For example putting an ear to a door to hear what's on the other side, checking for traps, etc.
>>
>>85538588
>I have a clear idea of whose form is better and who is getting the best of each exchange.
Oh yeah for sure man total strategic tactical analysis of the gun kata just like in the equilibrium movie, no the best you could do with the right roll is have a good idea of who is the more skilled fighter and in no way does that equate to know the total attack bonus of the opponent.
>More to the point, I have a clear idea of whose form is better and who is getting the best of each exchange.
Yeah, what if I lied to you. What if the one I just told you was +3 to hit was actually a lot better than I told you? What if in reality he is +12 and only feinting to appear weaker than his opponent? With your meta game observations there's the chance you could learn this just by observing my dice rolls and thereby have access to knowledge your character could not possibly possess. Hence the reason for hiding certain rolls so the players are unable to meta game what their characters don't know.
>>
>>85538588
you can say things like
> "you can tell this guy is clearly a master swordsman"
> "the guard seems nervous, and holds his sword in front of him like he never expected to draw it"
> "you can tell that attack hurt more than a shallow cut to the arm usually does, something's up with this guy's sword"
> "you can't tell much of note because you're fucking blinded, please stop asking with different phrasings james"
> "the ogre is clumsy but strong, you get the feeling if that had hit it might have taken your head off"
>>
>>85533468
>yeah but some rolls are better hidden behind the screen no?
I've never found the need, even though I appreciate that seems like an obvious assumption.
In fact for dnd I stopped rolling dice all together as DM, rolls are all player responsibility, I even make them roll when I want a number off a random chart so they can blame each other for whatever random encounter or mummy's curse or whatever drops out.
There's just no need to hide any die rolls from my perspective. Sure, after a few rounds maybe they can get a fairly accurate idea of what an enemy's AC is, so what? By then they're already fighting it anyway. What do I need to hide? If I don't want them to know if something has succeeded or not I just don't say so until it would be obvious to the characters.
>>
>>85539097
What does it add, hiding the bonus from the player?
>>85539265
>I stopped rolling dice all together as DM
Based.
>>
>>85540304
>What does it add
Wrong question.
What does it prevent? Using meta game knowledge.
>>
>>85533386
"Use the screen only when neither the player nor the target of the player's action can know either their own result or their target's result." - Gary Gygax
>>
>>85540760
In the instance of a flat fight between one PC and one NPC, what purpose does it serve obfuscating the bonus to hit? What meta knowledge could be important here?
In so far as feinting is a thing, it's usually to mislead a blocking move, not to appear weak.
>>
>>85540803
>In the instance of a flat fight between one PC and one NPC, what purpose does it serve obfuscating the bonus to hit?
Making decisions based on meta game knowledge.
>to appear weaker so as to deceive the opponent.
This tactic has been a solid trope of media since forever I've literally just watched that ruse play out 5 minutes ago after watching season 11 episode 13 of The Walking Dead.
>>
>>85534567
Every time you post it is magically even stupider than whatever you previously typed. Its impressively retarded.
>>
>>85534760
depends. are you a "fighter", someone who is specially trained in multiple forms of combat? are the guys your watching? how close are you? what is the lighting like? what about the other guys? are they even humanoids? are they just naturally good or are they skilled? can you really tell the difference? no it should not be obvious, unless of course it is, but then the dm would tell you that you know obvious things.
>>
>>85533386
>Mike [Mornard] gave a fascinating account of a typical early D&D game, with a peculiar detail that I’d never heard before. Gary [Gygax] never used maps or minis: maps and minis were Dave Arneson’s thing. Gary ran games in his office, which was provided with chairs, a couch, and file cabinets. While playing, Gary would open the drawers of the file cabinet and sit behind them so that the players COULD NOT SEE HIM. They only experienced the Dungeon Master as a disembodied voice.
>>
I only use it because my friend group started playing with one, but other than hiding player perception/enemy stealth rolls and maybe my notes and dungeon maps, it just takes space.
>>
>>85540850
Yeah but after being engaged with the enemy, wouldn't you be able to get an idea of how well the enemy hits, or how easy it is to hit them? I don't really mind if the dm rolls with a screen or not, unless there are trust issues, but I see few rolls you would want to hide other than perception and stealth
>>
>>85542527
>wouldn't you be able to get an idea of how well the enemy hits, or how easy it is to hit them?
If enemy hits 5 times out of 10 attacks and rolls happen behind the screen you wouldn't know for sure if that's because he has 50% chance to hit and DM rolled averagely, has 25% to hit and DM rolled exceptionally well, or has 75% to hit and DM rolled poorly.
Meanwhile when rolls happen in open and you see that 6 hits or that 16 doesn't you have immediate conclusion you're dealing with something strong/weak.
>>
File: 1501938262026.jpg (34 KB, 550x550)
34 KB
34 KB JPG
>>85533386
Any roll that will cause players to involuntarily metagame due to either a skill check being called or s PC'S roll determing whether the rest of the party bothers to roll, especially social checks between PCs, should be hidden.

I've had a DM completely ruin a character by constantly forcing deception checks from me when other players asked questions. It didn't matter how good I rolled. It was just the norm that because a deception check was called that the party dug until laws of averages forced things.

Aside from that, I'm sick of seeing players asking to make checks when another openly rolls a 1.
>>
>>85542569
With information, your player can decide whether to retreat or press, and so on. With obfuscation your player basically has to guess.
Games are more fun when meaningful choices are made, and choices are only meaningful when there's information to base them on. Otherwise it's just coinflips like blank T junctions in a dungeon.
If an NPC is deliberately feinting, presumably there's an actual rule for it that reduces their bonus and the like. Otherwise it's not a feint, it's random chance.
>>
>>85533386
>>85533468
Yes some rolls should be made behind the screen.
Example
>roll perception in view of everyone
>result; 20
"you don't see or hear anything"
Or
>roll perception behind screen
>result; unknown to the players
"You don't see or hear anything"
One of these keeps the tension up and the other makes the players relax because they know they rolled high and can trust that there is no danger.
Perception, charisma and stealth checks should all be made behind the screen. As well as any DM rolls like wandering monsters, encounter tables, reactions and when you want to randomize something because you can't decide.
All combat rolls should be made in the open.
>>
File: 1634238263266.gif (950 KB, 319x144)
950 KB
950 KB GIF
>>85542941
>I'm sick of seeing players asking to make checks when another openly rolls a 1.
>>
>>85543727
>Perception, charisma and stealth checks should all be made behind the screen.
They should all be passive values and rolled against by the GM behind the screen.
>>
>>85533386
My last group we usually rolled in the open, which occasionally made the DM seethe because we'd occasionally win because he rolled really badly.
So one session he decides to roll behind the screen, and also banned us from rolling our own skill checks and that he would roll them for us for suspense. It quickly stopped being suspenseful when apparently we never rolled above a 2 on our secret skill checks the entire time, and then we party wiped because he apparently rolled 15 natural 20s in a row. He was banned from ever rolling behind a screen and we as a group, to his annoyance, declared that session never happened. Mysteriously his amazing lucky streak ended the instant he had to roll out in the open again.
>>
>>85543786
Agreed.
>>
>>85543620
>With information, your player can decide whether to retreat or press, and so on. With obfuscation your player basically has to guess.
That's the whole point, it encourages the player to asks questions and become more engaged with the game and that those decisions have weight and consequence especially when not all the information to make an optimal decision is available. If the player has acquired and is using meta knowledge of any given event it becomes more an excercise in applying a maths formula to overcome the unknown rather than an exercise in role playing.
>>
>>85543956
>it encourages the player to asks questions
What questions, and how much information do you give? If you mean >>85539138 that's just the same information with extra steps anyway, but I can respect the narrative hustle.
>decisions have weight and consequence especially when not all the information to make an optimal decision is available
If you don't have information, decisions become completely irrelevant.
>>
>>85533386
All rolls with the "Secret" trait.
>>
>>85542941
>I've had a DM completely ruin a character by constantly forcing deception checks from me when other players asked questions. It didn't matter how good I rolled. It was just the norm that because a deception check was called that the party dug until laws of averages forced things.
Can you explain this a bit? Were they asking your character questions? Why deception? Was your character hiding something?
>>
>>85533386
It's personal taste. Some dms keep all rolls hidden and control the flow of narrative thusly. Others only keep specific rolls hidden like perception, or even stealth rolls for the players. I tend to make rolls hidden when I want to increase tension because my players usually assume I'm hiding the rolls for nefarious reasons.
>>
>>85533386
Always Open Roll
>>
>>85544307
>that's just the same information with extra steps anyway
No it's nothing of the sort. What you're equating to having the 'information' is instead pressing pause on 'the matrix'. Opening a seam in space time continuum and having a good gander at the present state of the underlying quantum operating system virtual presentation layer and then making your future decisions based on those facts. After all that is exactly what the rules and game statistics of the in game elements convey to present the 'reality' of the environment in which the characters live and exist. This anon you linked >>85539138 has the right of it, the DM is the eyes and ears of your character and conveys to you your general assumptions and observations as your own eyes and ears would in real life, what he doesn't do and what your eyes and ears don't do for you is provide a complete, exhaustive understanding at the microscopic level of the fundamental realities of existence in its present and likely future state which by learning game statistics of things other than your character would be the equivalent of for your character in game. To use another example it's like you buying a computer game and then accessing the source code to understand how to play to win the game, no one would accept that you're playing the game as it is intended to be played.
>If you don't have information, decisions become completely irrelevant.
You have the information as it is intended to present to you as a player for the reasons described above.
>>
>>85533873
Imagine the scene, the players are trying to sneak past a dragon that appears to be sleeping.

DM rolls a dice to see if the dragon notices them. If he had rolled it in plain view, the players might work out (Oh no! A 20!) if the dragon noticed them or not, something that they might not know, as the dragon could notice them but pretend to still be asleep to let them get within biting range. Having a screen allows the DM to see if the dragon notices them without the players knowing if it has or not until it pounces. The tension adds to the roleplaying and fun of the game.

You do need an honest DM though who applies the same rules for the players to the monsters, and the players to trust that he wont ignore the roll unfairly, ie to railroad them (I planned the dragon fight so its going to happen no matter what the players try!) or if he is a cunt (My wife yelled at me for not doing the dishes, so I'm going to work out my anger by fucking over the players tonight),
>>
>>85533846
>something important happening
You seem to be a storyshitter yourself.
>>
File: 512x512bb.jpg (49 KB, 512x512)
49 KB
49 KB JPG
>>85545384
>>
>>85533386
My system is palyer facing. I only roll on randome tables. Just give them encounter number, say 14 and kick back and focus on cinematics and monster abilities.
If something is possible ot just happens. If I need do consult Oracle Table I do it on my phone at palm the die.
>>
>>85534424
>cheat themselves and their players.
???
The only way to cheat the player is if they are not having fun.
You can't cheat in a game you CAN'T win.
>>
>>85544618
The imperfect filter of the GMs narration over what is a very simple numerical value seems unnecessary.
After all, nearly every danger an adventurer should face is "deadly" and "risky" and so forth. You only have a limited palette to paint with in terms of implying the enemy's capabilities.
I'm not arguing against narration, and the rich description of the gameworld is important. I just think the numbers should be accessible.
If my player is playing a skilled climber and wants to look at a wall for handholds, I tell him about the wall AND the DC of the wall. There's no point me describing it as "tough" and then landing him with a -150 penalty and sending him to his death before he can back out.
>>
>>85545783
>There's no point me describing it as "tough" and then landing him with a -150 penalty and sending him to his death before he can back out.
I think you can communicate this sufficiently by words to express the nigh on impossibility of the climb without expressing in game numerical format and I'm of the opinion player engagement is better promoted by not doing so. Though also understand I'm not judging you for that decision, you're game play it your way.
>>
>>85546291
>you're game play it your way.
*your decision play it your way.
>>
>>85533386
Roll only if failure is interesting or otherwise of consequence. And roll behind the screen what doesn't have an immediately apparent outcome. Yes, that includes PC checks for things like stealth, perception or knowledge skills.
Don't abuse this with shit like PCs ingesting a poison that kills them hours later though. Hiding rolls is a tool to prevent them from metagaming bad rolls and keeping some of the game math behind a curtain, not to fuck over players.

>>85534702
Agreed. Rolling everything in the open is nothing to be proud of. If players otherwise don't trust you not to fuck them over, you need to find another group.
>>
>>85546291
I overstated my case, but I can assure you I've seen player/GM misunderstandings of that kind. I respect your position too, though. /tg/ is a chill place today.
>>
File: 1568653709273.png (3.42 MB, 3600x2864)
3.42 MB
3.42 MB PNG
>>85544432
I was playing a character with a background similar to Cloud in FF7 in that he had a mostly made up past pretending to be someone else. During a conversation, another PC asked me some pretty innocent sort of questions regarding my PC's past which I answered with a lie. It wasn't something huge. The DM then called a deception check which pinged the entire table into digging even though I passed the check because the DM told the entire table I was lying which could have been avoided by a discreet roll. The other players metagaming is also to blame, but it was one call that opened the entire thing up.
>>
>>85548369
Sorry I don't speak weeb, but rolling social checks between PCs is retarded in 100% of the cases



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.