Hidden LM dice rolls?

[aramis]

I think the debate over hidden rolls is one that's philosophically rooted in two opposing viewpoints about immersion and metagaming. To really grossly paraphrase the two positions:

Group 1 thinks that it doesn't matter what information the players have because "good roleplayers" won't use information their characters don't have. Therefore it's fine for the players to roll their own Awareness (or Perception, or Find Traps, or whatever) because to use the information gained by a failed roll would be metagaming, and immersion is when players convincingly enact the thoughts and emotions of their characters.

Group 2 thinks it works the other way: immersion is when the player is feeling the thoughts and emotions of the character. Therefore to have to pretend the character doesn't suspect anything when the player clearly does (having just failed an ominous Awareness roll) is breaking immersion. Metagaming is fine when it allows the game to quickly move past the non-immersive bits.

I'm pretty firmly in Group 2, but that doesn't mean I like hidden dice rolls. The solution, I believe, is in good adventure/encounter design: you ask the player to roll Awareness (or whatever) but you have something to offer him/her on a failed roll. "Yeah, you hear what might be footsteps on dry leaves." That leaves the player (not just the character) wondering what was missed, without necessarily spoiling the surprise.

There was a huge debate (well, lots of them) over at Wizards about using Perception to find traps when the character isn't explicitly looking for them, and the question of secret dice rolls came up. The arguments I found the most persuasive were the ones that said, in effect, "If you've got a binary outcome that depends on a 'secret' roll (whether or not it's actually rolled in secret) then your traps are badly designed."

An alternative to "If you pass the Perception check, you may then disarm the trap, otherwise you trigger it" would be:
1) Have the player roll Perception.
2) If they pass, they spot signs of a trap.*
3) If they fail, they get themselves into a tight spot. I.e., "Ok, you step on a pressure plate and feel it give, but you catch yourself in time and don't pick your foot up. What do you do?" (Yes, big Dungeon World influence here.)

That way they make their own Perception roll and see the outcome, but there isn't really a choice to re-roll ("Can I try again?" "Wait...I want to try, too!" or whatever) but neither are you totally screwed. Perception would have made something easier, is all.

*And, by the way, I'm NOT in the camp that feels it adds anything to actually describe the mechanics of the trap, and then expect the player to describe how they would actually disarm such a thing. "Wrong! It was the blue wire. Take 6d8 blast damage." I'd much rather tell the player, "You spotted a trap; it's a pressure plate on the floor. Tell us how it works and how you disarm it...."

/dissertation

P.S. And this relates to the recent thread about sneaking up and assassinating a lone guard, too. If the outcome is binary (i.e., you either sneak in successfully, or you wake up the whole fort) then the problem is in the adventure design.

You missed another large group - which is the one I'm in - rolling in the open prevents the temptation to fudge the rolls (in either direction). Plus, if the players know what the roll is for, they have the suspense of hanging on the outcome of the dice.

[SirGalrim]

You missed another large group - which is the one I'm in - rolling in the open prevents the temptation to fudge the rolls (in either direction). Plus, if the players know what the roll is for, they have the suspense of hanging on the outcome of the dice.

I have experienced the same. All groups of players I have GMed for becomes much more enthusiastic about the actions of the NPC, whether they are allies or adversaries, when the rolls are open. When I declare what the NPC is about to do and do and open roll they usually pay attention. Cheer if an ally NPC succeed, cheer if an adversary NPC fail. If the rolls are hidden players have tendency being more passive. They just wait to hear the result what has happened, and jot it down on their sheets. Of course if you run a investigation scenario you might not want all the rolls open. I would suggest either makes all Loremaster roll on beforehand and write it down, or rather making the players do all the roll. Someone trying to fools the players use 10 + attribute level OR 12 + their skill rank as the TN for the players roll.

Hi All,
A problem does occur when the LM does not tell the player something has happened and there is no immediate consequence. So in the example I gave above with the goblins, the consequence for not telling the players the goblin escaped could happen two hours later in "real time" (or even at the beginning of the next game
session) and the trait will not be used to roll back the event (unforeseen action) or gain an advancement point.
If I were to take away the opportunity to use a trait for story purposes (which I do sometimes as explained above), then I would try to provide the opportunity for the character to use that trait at a later date.

I respect that this works for you, but I would not implement this. First of it takes away the opportunity the player has to use his character traits. TOR is a more narrative game than traditionally RPGs. Players has a say in the story even if I as a LM wants the goblin to get away and it might have been logical in the situation. Your interpretation would contradict the example given in the rulebook for using traits for interceding with actions the LM didn't allow the players to roll for. You touch upon compensating for this, but I find it difficult and unwieldy to directly to compensate. (Though I think its good to compensate if you playing it your way!). I would have to keep the compensation in mind and steer the story towards that. It would be easily forgotten in the heat of adventure, and I would not like to "owe" it to the player to the next session.

[Glorelendil]

You missed another large group - which is the one I'm in - rolling in the open prevents the temptation to fudge the rolls (in either direction). Plus, if the players know what the roll is for, they have the suspense of hanging on the outcome of the dice.

For players who worry about fudged dice rolls you are correct, but that's not really an additional category in the dichotomy I was describing.

And, yes, I fully agree that rolling in the open involves the players more.

[Kurt]

I respect that this works for you, but I would not implement this. First of it takes away the opportunity the player has to use his character traits.

Hi Sir Galrim,

The examples above were for illustrative purposes and to address the topic on whether or not to hide dice rolls. I wanted to show that if someone in the party has appropriate traits for the situation at hand and there is an immediate consequence, there is no real difference if you hide dice rolls or not. This is due to the ability for a trait to roll back unforeseen events. If on the other hand there is no immediate consequence, then not telling a player something happened does matter and that is where the LM has to be careful. I know that this situation contradicts the rules by not allowing for trait usage, I was giving the example for this reason. You can't roll back an unforeseen event if you don't know about it and you find out when it's too late to do anything about it. I was stating if a character has an appropriate trait, it's not the hidden dice rolling that matters. What matters is when the consequence of the event being rolled on occurs so that the character with the trait has the ability to respond accordingly.

Cheers,
Kurt

[SirGalrim]

The examples above were for illustrative purposes and to address the topic on whether or not to hide dice rolls. I wanted to show that if someone in the party has appropriate traits for the situation at hand and there is an immediate consequence, there is no real difference if you hide dice rolls or not. This is due to the ability for a trait to roll back unforeseen events.

Agreed.

If on the other hand there is no immediate consequence, then not telling a player something happened does matter and that is where the LM has to be careful. I know that this situation contradicts the rules by not allowing for trait usage, I was giving the example for this reason. You can't roll back an unforeseen event if you don't know about it or if you find out when it's too late. I was stating if a character has an appropriate trait it's not the hidden dice rolling that matters, but it's when the consequence of the event being rolled on occurs.

Understood, but it is here I would not rule it the way you do. I understand your argument when it comes to the timing of the consequence. But what I would say is in my opinion it should not affect that rolls are done hidden. Since there is a possibility of traits to roll back unforeseen events there is no reason to hide rolls.

Edit: Rereading your posts Kurt I think we mostly agree. We just disagree on whether a LM should on certain occasion take away the opportunity for a player to use a trait for story purposes. Right?

[Kurt]

Understood, but it is here I would not rule it the way you do. I understand your argument when it comes to the timing of the consequence. But what I would say is in my opinion it should not affect that rolls are done hidden. Since there is a possibility of traits to roll back unforeseen events there is no reason to hide rolls.

I'm not ruling anything. I am just stating what the outcomes are for using traits if you have hidden rolls and under what conditions the lost opportunity for an advancement point will occur.

[Kurt]

We just disagree on whether a LM should on certain occasion take away the opportunity for a player to use a trait for story purposes. Right?

Well, each LM has their different style. In the past I used hidden rolls for dramatic affect, immersion, bringing the players back to the story line etc. But those games had a different system so for TOR things need to be done a little more carefully. I'm not going to rule out using the 'hidden dice roll' for some of the things mentioned above. I may need to do it to bring the players back towards the main story. However, given that this is a different system I will need to take more care with doing that (if I do it at all). I'd need to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to roleplay their unique character appropriately (traits and unforeseen events) and the company progress their characters together at a similar rate (advancement points).

Cheers,
Kurt

[Majestic]

I tend to roll almost all rolls out in the open for all my games, with rare exceptions (when it is needed for the purposes of a mystery).

For TOR you can't really do what I might do in other games, where I might call on the players to roll a Perception-type roll out of the blue (and not when anything is even present), just to keep the players from knowing when something might occur (they're not likely to set up for an ambush every time when many times it's not anything but the random crack of a tree branch). Other games (like 5E D&D) have a "passive score" that the GM can use.

But the mechanics of TOR don't really work with this approach, being as the players need to know details for purposes of Advancement Points, and even have the potential of turning a failure into a success (doing a retcon, as it were, as with the example of the fleeing Goblin).

*And, by the way, I'm NOT in the camp that feels it adds anything to actually describe the mechanics of the trap, and then expect the player to describe how they would actually disarm such a thing. "Wrong! It was the blue wire. Take 6d8 blast damage." I'd much rather tell the player, "You spotted a trap; it's a pressure plate on the floor. Tell us how it works and how you disarm it...."

I'm not fond of either approach, myself. I don't expect my player of a spinal surgeon to be able to articulate how exactly they perform back surgery, and likewise I don't think it's fair to potentially have the player explain how something works (as it is often the case where the player may not know as much as their character does about a particular skill). I'd usually prefer the player to roll, and - if their character is one that is good at disarming traps - the result can simply be that "my character disarms the trap", without the need for any details.

[Terisonen]

And for goodness sake, NEVER include a Perception test for noticing the secret door/macguffin/character that you simply MUST notice for the adventure to continue!

This is 250% true

[Glorelendil]

And for goodness sake, NEVER include a Perception test for noticing the secret door/macguffin/character that you simply MUST notice for the adventure to continue!

This is 250% true

I haven't heard anybody on these forums arguing or even suggesting otherwise.