PDA

View Full Version : Rolls against so many secret things.



Totally Guy
2010-03-29, 12:47 PM
I was playing in a World of Darkness game yesterday where I felt I was rolling more secret rolls than any other kind.

The GM would say roll this and that, but wouldn't tell me why. Like a spot check "I can't say it's to spot the monster behind the door because then you'd know either way".

He said that all the secrets he had were part of the fun. But I didn't find it fun. For most of the time nothing happened and I lost more and more understanding of our story.

Plus I found he was calling me to roll the same things (or very similar things) over and over until I eventually (inevitably) failed and then something bad happened.

I'm always frustrated in these games and that's my number one peeve.

MickJay
2010-03-29, 12:51 PM
Ask your GM if he could make these rolls himself, or maybe even pre-roll some, to determine at which point of the story something happens. Determining random events by a die roll is fun, but if it suddenly becomes a major part of the game, it does get a bit tedious.

valadil
2010-03-29, 12:51 PM
Do you mind secret rolls when they aren't overused? I like them for handing out a little bit of paranoia. Your GM definitely went overboard though, so I'm wondering if it's because of the secret rolls or because he overdid it.

toddex
2010-03-29, 12:52 PM
I was playing in a World of Darkness game yesterday where I felt I was rolling more secret rolls than any other kind.

The GM would say roll this and that, but wouldn't tell me why. Like a spot check "I can't say it's to spot the monster behind the door because then you'd know either way".

He said that all the secrets he had were part of the fun. But I didn't find it fun. For most of the time nothing happened and I lost more and more understanding of our story.

Plus I found he was calling me to roll the same things (or very similar things) over and over until I eventually (inevitably) failed and then something bad happened.

I'm always frustrated in these games and that's my number one peeve.

Maybe its just paranoia? I love DMs having me roll and not telling me what for, adds to the mystery and danger.

Totally Guy
2010-03-29, 01:06 PM
Do you mind secret rolls when they aren't overused?

Actually, thinking hard about this question, I think I do mind.

It feels like I'm not trusted enough to role play not knowing something.

Defiant
2010-03-29, 01:08 PM
Actually, thinking hard about this question, I think I do mind.

It feels like I'm not trusted enough to role play not knowing something.

Even if I trust my players, I'd rather they not know, for the extra excitement factor. YMMV

arguskos
2010-03-29, 01:10 PM
Actually, thinking hard about this question, I think I do mind.

It feels like I'm not trusted enough to role play not knowing something.
Have you considered it might not be you? Your DM may not be able to trust the other players, and is hoping that you'll understand and roll with it.

For example, I have a player in my current group who I honestly feel would metagame (based on previous experiences). I don't want that to happen, so I will occasionally make secret rolls for the group and not explain what is happening. It's not that I distrust the whole group, but that one specific player has a history of doing this, and so I take the needed steps to prevent it.

It's possible your DM is doing something similar.

Yakk
2010-03-29, 01:24 PM
Well, if you are rolling something over and over again, doesn't something happen when you succeed?

Ie, a roll where there is a bad consequence on one side, no good consequence on the other, and is repeated until failure ... isn't a roll.

I find stealth is really bad with this in general: do you roll stealth every time you pick your nose, or do you roll stealth once to break into the castle, grab the crown jewels, and then get out again without leaving a trace?

valadil
2010-03-29, 01:38 PM
Actually, thinking hard about this question, I think I do mind.

It feels like I'm not trusted enough to role play not knowing something.

Interesting. I have the opposite reaction. If my character doesn't know something I'd rather not know it myself. I don't like being put in the position of having to pretend I don't know. When that happens, my instinct is to do the opposite of what I would do if I had that knowledge. But that action is determined by the knowledge too. So I go back a little. Sometimes I do nothing. Sometimes I try to figure out how I'd legitimately gain the knowledge. But however I go I end up second guessing whether or not I'm metagaming. And even if I manage to avoid metagaming, figuring out what to do at this point impedes my roleplaying.

Swordgleam
2010-03-29, 01:55 PM
I find this interesting, because I've rarely seen that happen. I'm used to the opposite kind of secret roll - a player says "I search for traps" and the GM rolls and says, "You're very very sure that there are no traps." Did the player get a very high or a very low roll? It's part of the fun.

Knowing that I just rolled a 1 and not knowing why might be fun, but knowing that I rolled a 13 and not knowing why wouldn't be exciting at all.

taltamir
2010-03-29, 01:59 PM
telling you to roll is giving you ample information though. Unless he is using reverse psychology...

if you are rolling at all it is not a secret roll, if you are rolling and know which SKILL you are roll for it is definitely not a secret roll.
A secret roll is a roll that the DM rolls in secret. This is why he needs access to your character sheet, so he can see your stats and be able to do that. Ideally he should have a computer program for such rolls so that you cannot hear the dice either

Totally Guy
2010-03-29, 02:15 PM
I'm confused.

If he was playing a mind game on me then what does that accomplish? If I make a decision based on my paranoia isn't that a decision using the metagame. I mean my character wouldn't necessarily be paranoid.

All I'm drawing is the conclusion that mind games like that are encouraging a specific type of metagame behaviour.

taltamir
2010-03-29, 02:23 PM
If he was playing a mind game on me then what does that accomplish? If I make a decision based on my paranoia isn't that a decision using the metagame.

that is actually my point as to why he shouldn't be asking you to roll, but rolling himself.
you could present it to him that way, say it makes it difficult not to metagame when he tells you what to roll for.

Riffington
2010-03-29, 02:25 PM
If he was playing a mind game on me then what does that accomplish? If I make a decision based on my paranoia isn't that a decision using the metagame. I mean my character wouldn't necessarily be paranoid.



Well, it's only useful to have players make rolls like that when there is a reason for your character to be paranoid.
You walk into a Tremere Chantry, darn right you're making some rolls with no idea what they're for. If you were just doing your taxes, different story.

absolmorph
2010-03-29, 02:28 PM
telling you to roll is giving you ample information though. Unless he is using reverse psychology...

if you are rolling at all it is not a secret roll, if you are rolling and know which SKILL you are roll for it is definitely not a secret roll.
A secret roll is a roll that the DM rolls in secret. This is why he needs access to your character sheet, so he can see your stats and be able to do that. Ideally he should have a computer program for such rolls so that you cannot hear the dice either
Seeing my grin and my hand rolling a dice for something that they have no knowledge of is part of the fun for me.
Of course, I haven't had much need for secret rolls. Yet.

valadil
2010-03-29, 02:30 PM
Well, it's only useful to have players make rolls like that when there is a reason for your character to be paranoid.
You walk into a Tremere Chantry, darn right you're making some rolls with no idea what they're for. If you were just doing your taxes, different story.

Mmm. Players aren't sufficiently scared in games. They always know whats coming. If you put a knife to their throat, they assume they can take the d4 damage and then start combat. The unknown is inherently scary. Dropping some of that in the game can make the players act scared again.

Eclipse
2010-03-29, 02:35 PM
I'm confused.

If he was playing a mind game on me then what does that accomplish? If I make a decision based on my paranoia isn't that a decision using the metagame. I mean my character wouldn't necessarily be paranoid.

All I'm drawing is the conclusion that mind games like that are encouraging a specific type of metagame behaviour.

This is a tactic I used to use. The purpose was misdirection, and my players picked it up quickly. Basically, they came to know that me rolling or asking for a roll didn't automatically signify something was about to happen. They got used to the idea that it's just me throwing dice to make sure that when something does happen, they can't guess based on me rolling. So it wasn't intended to make anyone paranoid, it was to make sure they would treat rolling dice as a background item until something happening in game told them otherwise.

I've now switched it up a bit, to what I think is a much better system. I either use a passive score based on player stats unless they take an action themselves (such as scanning the perimeter), or I'll roll the dice for them when it's something they don't elect to do on their own, such as noticing there's an ambush up ahead. In WoD, I'll usually roll the npc dice against a difficulty equal to the relevant attribute + ability on the character sheet. The D&D equivalent is to have PCs automatically take 10 on passive skills until they use them actively.

In any case, I would not tell players information their characters don't know. I make an exception for information known by at least one member of a party, but if no characters know the info, no one in the party is going to know it either. It's too easy to be swayed by having the info, either into doing something beneficial by metagaming to your advantage, or detrimental by metagaming to your disadvantage. It's very, very difficult to do exactly what you would do if you didn't know the info in the first place. So, players get no more info than that known by the group as a whole, and it's not a problem. It's not an issue of trust. I trust players to play the game within the rules. But it's very easy to metagame without intending to, as illustrated by valadil. Better to just not be in that situation.

At the end of a campaign, I will fill in any missing plot pieces players are interested in, or let them know what was going on in a particular situation once it's no longer relevant to what the players will be doing. But while it's still relevant, it's a secret until someone manages to figure it out in game.

Edit: Riffington also has a great point about the multiple rolls being used to induce paranoia in situations where you should be scared but aren't. A great way to add tension and put the suspense and fear where it should be in some circumstances if you use dice more traditionally than I do.

HunterOfJello
2010-03-29, 02:39 PM
This seems like a good example of how anything overused in a game quickly becomes unenjoyable.

Ernir
2010-03-29, 02:43 PM
This seems like a good example of how anything overused in a game quickly becomes unenjoyable.

Yah.

I sometimes ask for "secret rolls". It's a tool to build suspense, not one to keep information away.
If I actually didn't want them to know, why wouldn't I roll it myself? :smallconfused:

unre9istered
2010-03-29, 02:48 PM
The fact that he repeatedly rolled successfully and nothing happened and then when he rolled a failure and something bad happened is suspicious. Especially in a WoD game where you know if you succeeded or not. If I roll 5, 9, and 7 successes on Awareness checks and nothing happens, when I roll no successes and I get ambushed, then I'm going to suspect the GM of having decided his NPC's are going to successfully ambush me no matter what. If my GM does that I'm going to wonder why I bothered putting points into Awareness at all.

Lamech
2010-03-29, 02:55 PM
Depends on what he's rolling against. If your rolling against say... a tainted area, or carbon monoxide success is nothing bad happening. If your rolling awareness, (baring wierd circumstances), good rolls better mean you spotted something.

Greenish
2010-03-29, 03:07 PM
Depends on what he's rolling against. If your rolling against say... a tainted area, or carbon monoxide success is nothing bad happening. If your rolling awareness, (baring wierd circumstances), good rolls better mean you spotted something."Okay guys, you enter the tavern… Roll against carbon monoxide!" :smallamused:

Bibliomancer
2010-03-29, 03:11 PM
If they aren't overused (as they appear to have been, in this case) secret rolls can be useful, especially since they affect paranoid optimizers and/or experienced players the most. (http://www.wizards.com/global/images/rpga_hq_polyffs5_picMain_en.gif)